Leader Technologies v. Facebook Patent Infringement Trial Ends in a Split Verdict

On March 17, 2010, Barack Obama nominated Leonard P. Stark to the Delaware District Court bench where the Leader v. Facebook case was proceeding. James Chandler evidently recommended Stark. Vice President Joe Biden sponsored Stark who proceeded to pave the way for State Department (Hillary Clinton) and Patent Office (David J. Kappos) use of Facebook.

Leader principals were informed that Facebook claimed that earlier versions of their computer source code did not exist prior to 2009 when Leader’s expert witness, Dr. Giovanni Vigna, University of California, Santa Barbara, forensically examined Facebook’s computer source code. This explanation did not ring true since computer programming source code is the life-blood of any credible software development effort, and is backed up routinely between versions (often called “builds”) to avoid loss of valuable work. This practice is especially important when many programmers must work together to write, debug and test each build of a program before releasing it for use. Facebook claimed illogically that they had kept no build backups for the first five years of their existence.

In Mark Zuckerberg’s deposition prior to the trial, Leader principals were informed that Zuckerberg was instructed by Facebook attorney Heidi L. Keefe, Cooley Godward LLP, not to answer any questions about his admitted hacking activities while at Harvard in 2003-2004:

BY MR. ANDRE [Leader counsel]:

Q. I’ll ask the question again. Mr. Zuckerberg, did you hack into the Harvard servers to get the photographs of the students to use in Facemash?

MS. KEEFE [Facebook counsel]: Same objection and this time I instruct you not to answer

BY MR. ANDRE:

Q. Are you taking your counsel’s advice?

BY MR. ZUCKERBERG:

A. Yes.”

Leader principals were informed that the denial of access to the historical Facebook information, and Zuckerberg’s refusal to answer any questions about his Harvard hacking activities precluded Leader from obtaining any facts from Facebook about its 2003-2004 formative period, other than what was publicly available. Leader was thus forced to go to trial without these facts which were important to Leader’s willfulness claim, and which may have generated new claims based on the truths uncovered.

Three weeks before Leader v. Facebook trial start, Obama forced his unconfirmed nominee, Leonard P. Stark, to become trial judge in this case, replacing trial Judge Joseph J. Farnan. This move contradicted Farnan’s prior statements of interest in presiding at the trial. Stark immediately allowed Facebook to add a new on-sale bar claim and blocked Leader from conducting additional discovery on the new claim. Stark’s ruling blocked Leader from deposing James P. Chandler, a material witness as well as a subject matter expert. Such conduct is a evident abuse of discretion and violation of Leader’s due process right to prepare defenses on the new claim.

On Jul. 8, 2010 (11 days before the Leader v. Facebook trial), Barack Obama appointed Theodore B. Olson, Gibson Dunn LLP, as well as 10 other attorneys with close Facebook ties) to be a member of the Council of the Administrative Conference of the United States. Thomas G. Hungar, Olson’s law partner and fellow protégé of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., became Facebook’s appeals attorney in Leader v. Facebook on May 18, 2011.

The Clinton’s were paid millions in speaking fees (former President Clinton) as well as donations from The Eclipse Foundation leading up to the trial and used their influence to put pawns in place and buy others loyalty.

On Jul. 18, 2010, Leader opposed Facebook’s introduction of substantial new on-sale bar evidence on the eve of trial—despite the legal requirement in 35 U.S.C. § 282 for Facebook to notify Leader in writing at least 30 days before trial of “the name and address of any person . . . as having previously used or offered for sale the invention of the patent in suit.” Judge Stark allowed the new evidence and denied Leader the opportunity to depose the witnesses, or to have technical experts evaluate the evidence.

On Jul. 28, 2010, the Leader v. Facebook jury returned in a split verdict. Leader proved that Facebook infringes Leader’s patent on 11 of 11 claims and that there was no prior art. Facebook prevailed on an “on-sale bar” claim—a claim not asserted until Jun. 24, 2010, three weeks before trial, and not proven according to the well-settled Pfaff and Group One evidence tests.

On Aug. 10, 2010, Leonard P. Stark is confirmed as U.S. judge for the District of Delaware. The Grand Quid Pro Quo to Barack Obama and the Deep State for the arranged Leader v. Facebook verdict.

Source: fbcoverup.com

Get involved!

Get Connected!

Join our community and get uncensored news, history, and social media. Expand your network and get to know more like-minded patriots and truthseekers!

Comments

No comments yet