Group items tagged

Today, by ordering a military trial at Guantanamo for 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants, Attorney General Eric Holder finally put the Obama administration's stamp on the proposition that some criminals are "too dangerous to have fair trials."

Barack Obamas indefinite detention claim, coupled with the enemy combatant right he inherited, enables him to lock up any US citizen forever without a trial, author and political consultant Naomi Wolf told RT.

United States v. Dougherty was a 1972 decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in which the court ruled that members of the D.C. Nine, who had broken into Dow Chemical Company, vandalized office furniture and equipment, and spilled about a bloodlike substance, were not entitled to a new trial on the basis of the judge's failing to allow a jury nullification jury instruction. The Appeals Court ruled, by a 2-1 vote: " The fact that there is widespread existence of the jury's prerogative, and approval of its existence as a "necessary counter to casehardened judges and arbitrary prosecutors," does not establish as an imperative that the jury must be informed by the judge of that power. On the contrary, it is pragmatically useful to structure instructions in such wise that the jury must feel strongly about the values involved in the case, so strongly that it must itself identify the case as establishing a call of high conscience, and must independently initiate and undertake an act in contravention of the established instructions. This requirement of independent jury conception confines the happening of the lawless jury to the occasional instance that does not violate, and viewed as an exception may even enhance, the over-all normative effect of the rule of law. An explicit instruction to a jury conveys an implied approval that runs the risk of degrading the legal structure requisite for true freedom, for an ordered liberty that protects against anarchy as well as tyranny. " Nonetheless, the defendants were given a new trial on the grounds that they had been denied their right of self-representation.[1] The Circuit Judges' assumption that jurors know about their nullification prerogative has since been brought into question by other empirical evidence.[2] According to Irwin Horowitz, "Beyond the empirical issue, lack of nullification instructions maintains a deceit. After all, juries can nullify, but they know this fact only on a so

On August 1, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituted an IPR petitioned by Unified on a patent owned and asserted by Rothschild Connected Devices Innovations, LLC. The Board instituted trial on U.S. 8,788,090 over the sole claim asserted in district court litigation. A copy of the filing can be found below.

A plan to put two Americans on trial for espionage sparks non-ironic outrage

We no longer have freedom; there is only the appearance of freedom. We are consumed by an endless and vague war on terror in which the perfidiousness of our enemy, whose number, location and nature are never clearly defined, justifies the shredding of constitutional rights, torture, kidnapping, detentions without charges or trials and an occult-like battle against an absolute evil. And if you think the state intends to limit itself to the persecution of Muslims, especially once there is an increase in domestic unrest and instability, you know little about human history.

We have the purpose of preventing bigots and ignoramuses from controlling… the United States. --Clarence Darrow at the Scopes Monkey Trial. Welcome to the late great United States - a country in economic and moral free fall.  A country in thrall to a cult of greed, selfishness, and ignorance.

As the trial began, the judge refused to let DeChristopher's defense team inform the jury that the auction was later overturned and declared illegal. The judge also refused to let the defense team inform the jury that DeChristopher had raised the money for the initial payment and offered it to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which then refused to accept it.

On July 5, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board dismissed IPR2016-00836, well prior to institution, due to a settlement between Verify Smart Corporation and Unified. A copy of the filing can be found below. Unified Patents Inc. v. Verify Smart Corporation, IPR2016-00836, Paper 7 (July 5, 2016) (Settled)

On June 27, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted IPR on all challenged claims on a patent owned and asserted by the Acacia Research-associated American Vehicular Sciences, LLC. The IPR, IPR2016-00364, challenged 1, 8, 10, 12, 17-19, 26, 27, and 36 of the patent, U.S. 9,043,093.

On June 21, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) awarded adverse judgment against patent owner Qurio Holdings, Inc., prior to institution, cancelling claims 1-3, 10, 12, and 15-18 of U.S. Patent 7,787,904, as challenged via joinder by Unified in IPR2016-00998.

We offer the best service to our clients, which is why we have been so successful in what we do. We are driven to get the best results and have won thousands of cases for our clients.

On August 29, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituted an IPR filed by Unified Patents Inc. on a patent related to electronic payments. The patent, U.S. Patent 6,891,633, has been asserted against dozens of banking institutions. The Board adopted an initial narrow claim construction and instituted review of claims 1-18 and 21-26 of the patent.