Thursday, March 7, 2013

WIPO Officials Refuse Domain Name Dispute Respondent Crystal Cox, a Copy of the "Declaration of Impartiality" they Claimed that WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson Signed. Francis Gurry WIPO, Edward Kwakwa WIPO, WIPO Officials, WIPO Eric Wilbers, ALL know of this FRAUD, Conspiracy, Collusion, and Corruption within WIPO and yet they take no official action, order no Special Investigation. Peter L. Michaelson's Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, SHOULD be disclosed to the respondents of Domain Names Disputes where he is the SOLE Panelist. Especially in the Marc J. Randazza V. Crystal Cox and Eliot Bernstein Domain Name Dispute, WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525, where Single Panelist Peter L. Michaelson PUBLICLY, Internationally Published that Respondent Eliot Bernstein and Respondent Crystal Cox were GUILTY of the Crime of Extortion. Of which neither Crystal Cox Nor Eliot Bernstein have been charged with or under investigation for. Peter L. Michaelson and WIPO have maliciously, intentionally, with actual malice, DEFAMED Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox and Inventor Eliot Bernstein. The eMail Below was sent on December 6th, 2012 by Crystal L. Cox to WIPO Officials.



"the Following eMail, as Seen Below, is from Xin Jiang for Jessica Park WIPO Case Worker to Crystal Cox and all parties of WIPO Case Number (EP) D2012-1525 was Sent: Friday, September 7, 2012 6:44 AM.  The Subject is (EP) D2012-1525 <marcjohnrandazza.com> et al. Notification of Panel Appointment.

Subject Matter of WIPO Email to Parties of WIPO Case Number (EP) D2012-1525 is regarding the Notification of Panel Appointment (1-member panel) for Domain Names marcjohnrandazza.com, marcjrandazza.com, and marcrandazza.com.  

Eliot Bernstein of iViewit Technologies owns marcjohnrandazza.com, marcjrandazza.com and I, Crystal Cox own marcrandazza.com and having written extensively for over 3 years on the Ivewit, Eliot Bernstein Story.

As you see the WIPO email below certifies that the selected Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has submitted a Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center.

Here is the EXACT quote from Xin Jiang for Jessica Park WIPO Case Worker, WIPO Case Number (EP) D2012-1525

"In accordance with Rules, Paragraph 7, the above Panelist has submitted a Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center."

I, Crystal L. Cox, in my Pro Se Capacity Demand a Copy of Peter L. Michaelson's Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence submitted to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, as noted below, as being in possession of the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center.

Crystal L. Cox
Pro Se Respondent 


Investigative Blogger

Search Engine Reputation Manager




From: "Domain.Disputes@wipo.int" <Domain.Disputes@wipo.int>
To: RDG@randazza.comrlgall@randazza.comSavvyBroker@Yahoo.com; savvybroker@Yahoo.com; iviewit@iviewit.tv
Sent: Friday, September 7, 2012 6:44 AM
Subject: (EP) D2012-1525 <marcjohnrandazza.com> et al. Notification of Panel Appointment

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

WIPO Logo

September 7, 2012
Re: Case No. D2012-1525
<marcjohnrandazza.com>
<marcjrandazza.com>
<marcrandazza.com>
Notification of Panel Appointment (1-member panel)
In accordance with Paragraph 6(f) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the Rules), you are hereby notified that an Administrative Panel ("Panel") has been appointed in the above-referenced case, consisting of a single member:

Peter L. Michaelson

The professional profile of the Panelist can be accessed at our web site (http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains).

In accordance with Rules, Paragraph 7, the above Panelist has submitted a Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center.

A copy of the relevant case file will shortly be transmitted to the Panel. If you would like to receive a list identifying materials transmitted to the Panel, please let us know by return email.

Absent exceptional circumstances, the Panel is required to forward its decision to us by September 21, 2012 in accordance with Rules, Paragraph 15.

Parties are reminded of the prohibition contained in Rules, Paragraph 8 against unilateral communications with the Panel.

Sincerely,

Xin Jiang
for Jessica Park
Case Manager
______________________________________________________________________________________________
34, chemin des Colombettes, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland
T +41 22 338 82 47 F +41 22 740 37 00 E domain.disputes@wipo.int W www.wipo.int/amc
"

Peter L. Michaelson's Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence Requested by Domain Owner Crystal Cox. DENIED Multiple Times.

WIPO, World Intellectual Property Organization, Knows of Massive Liability and Seem to FAIL to Disclose. WIPO, Francis Gurry, Eric Wilbers, and Edward Kwakwa know of the liability of the action of Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson and they Do NOTHING. Crystal Cox DENIED Statement of Neutrality, that WIPO Alleges Exists, Why? WIPO has HUGE Liability and has recently been named in a Major RICO Lawsuit, District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, in alleged conspiracy to cover up the worlds largest intellectual property THEFT, iViewit Technology theft.


Web Stat of WIPO, World Intellectual Property Organization, being INFORMED (Notified) of Massive Liability, yet doing NOTHING to Disclose or to make it right.

Visitor Analysis & System Spec
Referring URL:
Host Name:Browser:Firefox 10.0
IP Address:193.5.93.24 — [Label IP Address]Operating System:WinXP
Location:Geneva, Geneve, SwitzerlandResolution:1280x1024
Returning Visits:0Javascript:Enabled
Visit Length:Multiple visits spread over more than one dayISP:World Intellectual Property Organization

Navigation Path

DateTimeWebPage
17 Dec 201202:21:21
(No referring link)
17 Dec 201202:25:30
(No referring link)
17 Dec 201203:56:35
17 Dec 201204:01:09
(No referring link)
17 Dec 201204:34:42
(No referring link)
17 Dec 201208:11:38
(No referring link)
17 Dec 201223:54:26
(No referring link)
18 Dec 201208:57:18
(No referring link)
10 Jan01:24:15
(No referring link)
10 Jan01:29:17
(No referring link)
10 Jan01:48:53
(No referring link)
10 Jan01:50:21
(No referring link)
10 Jan01:51:58
(No referring link)
10 Jan01:58:47
10 Jan01:59:14
(No referring link)
10 Jan02:05:35
(No referring link)
10 Jan02:06:13
(No referring link)
10 Jan02:07:06
10 Jan02:18:36
10 Jan02:19:08
10 Jan02:26:15
6 Mar01:22:13


District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-VCF, RICO and Racketeering Complaint filed against WIPO, World Intellectual Property Organization, Francis Gurry Personally and Professionally, Eric Wilbers Personally and Professionally, and Edward Kwakwa Personally and Professionally, Personally and Professionally Peter L. Michaelson

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/147018909/District-of-Nevada-213-cv-00297-JCM-NJK-Civil-RICO-Complaint-COX-vs-Randazza-RacketeerCorrupt-Organization-Jurisdiction-Diversity-Case

Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox spoke with WIPO Executives in Early December of 2012, they know full well what Peter L. Michaelson has done and have FAILED to uphold the laws, ethics and codes of WIPO.

On December 14th, 2012, Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox sent a letter to WIPO, to eMail addresses given by Francis Gurry's secretary and by Eric Wilbers of WIPO.  WIPO executives did not respond in any way, yet the web stats prove they KNOW. Francis Gurry Personally and Professionally, Eric Wilbers Personally and Professionally, and Edward Kwakwa Personally and Professionally, Personally and Professionally Peter L. Michaelson ARE Liable and so is all invested in WIPO in any way, as this is a serious and massive legal action.

Here is the Open Letter to WIPO from December, and Was eMailed to eMail addresses given to us by WIPO.
http://www.francisgurry.com/2012/12/open-letter-to-wipo-director-francis.html

WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525 is Defamatory, Fraudulent, Conflicted, with Malice, Corrupt, Unconstitutional, Unethical. WIPO Officials KNOW and DO NOTHING.

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Christine C. Anderson New York Whistleblower Case, Legally Related to iViewit Technologies Case. Christine C. Anderson, Case No.: 07cv9599 Plaintiff-Appellant,(SAS)(AJP, 2d Cir. No. 09-5059-cv v. The State of New York,Defendants-Appellee



 Research Links Regarding Christine C. Anderson, Case No.: 07cv9599

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BlK73p4Ueo

http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=391

http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=337

http://exposecorruptcourts.blogspot.com/2010/09/anderson-moves-to-disqualify-ny.html

http://www.law.com/jsp/decision_friendly.jsp?id=1202513912956

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CO9yEPZfWm0

http://newyorkcourtcorruption.blogspot.com/2009/10/christine-anderson-whistleblower-of-1st.html

http://federalricolawsuit.blogspot.com/2010/01/christine-c-anderson-reveals-cleaner.html


"Witness Tampering Brings NYAttorney Christine Anderson Back to Federal Court
An Ethics Rouser EXCLUSIVE by Abe King - June 27, 2012
Widespread 'Ethics' Corruption Now Includes Threat on Witness in a Federal Proceeding"
http://ethicsrouser.blogspot.com/2012/06/ny-legal-ethics-scandal-whistleblower.html



Also Check Out iViewit Technology, Legally Related Case

http://www.iviewit.tv/#Evidence

iViewit Technology RICO Complaint
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080509%20FINAL%20AMENDED%20COMPLAINT%20AND%20RICO%20SIGNED%20COPY%20MED.pdf

iViewit Technology SEC Complaint
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf

http://www.josephrakofsky.com/2013/03/plaintiff-investigative-blogger-crystal.html


Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Pro Se Litigant Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox filed Federal RICO Complaint. Cox Vs. Randazza; Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction: Diversity Case Filed by Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal L. Cox, Connected to District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL

District of Nevada Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PAL, Randazza V. Cox, Docket Entry 89 States, “Defendant's Counter Complaint is STRICKEN. Defendant may only file her Counter Complaint as a separate lawsuit. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 2/22/13.” I, Pro Se Litigant Crystal L. Cox / Pro Se Defendant, Filed a "Separate Lawsuit As Per Court Order.

Here is that Filing, Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction

District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK Civil RICO Complaint, COX vs. Randazza. Racketeer/Corrupt Organization Jurisdiction: Diversity Case


Plaintiff's Opposition to Docket Entry 91 / Opposition 

to "RICO" Complaint Filing, Says;

"Defendant Cox’s request should be disregarded, as she has not properly filed her motion
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This Court already has held the above-captioned case to be
unrelated to Defendant Cox’s separate racketeering complaint and ordered that racketeering
complaint stricken from this suit. (ECF 89 at 3).

Cox’s filing the Motion serves only to waste Plaintiffs’ and this Court’s time, providing
further support that this Court should grant Plaintiffs’ Motion to Revoke Cox’s Electronic Filing
Privileges. (ECF 69) Cox has consented to the motion. (ECF 88) Furthermore, given that Cox is clearly now demonstrating herself to be a vexatious litigant, this Court should consider stronger corrective action beyond the motion filed in ECF 69.

Because Defendant Cox improperly filed her Motion for Leave to Continue In Forma
Pauperis, Plaintiffs respectfully requests the Court deny Cox’s Motion."

"Dated: February 25, 2013

Respectfully submitted,
/s/Ronald D. Green
Ronald D. Green, NV Bar #7360
Randazza Legal Group"


Pro Se Defendant Crystal L. Cox's Reply to 

Plaintiff's Opposition to Docket Entry 91,
Opposition to "RICO" Complaint Filing.


Reply to Response in Opposition of Document 91


February 26th, 2013 Court Ruling to Allow Opening of New Civil Action

"Document Number:94

Docket Text:

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Gloria M. Navarro, on 2/26/2013. By Deputy Clerk: AMW.

Pursuant to the Court's Order (ECF No. [89]) Striking Defendant Crystal Cox's Amended Counter Complaint and for good cause appearing, the Court hereby finds that Defendant's Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. [91]) should be construed as a request to commence a separate civil action. Thus, the Court hereby directs the Clerk's Office to use Defendant's filing, ECF No. [91], to open a new civil action."

New Case Details


Cox vs. Randazza, et al.,
Assigned to: Judge James C. Mahan
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe
Demand: $100,000,000,000
Cause: 18:1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act

Date Filed: 02/24/2013
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 470 Racketeer/Corrupt Organization
Jurisdiction: Diversity




Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act Defined for Readers


"The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as the RICO Act or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. The RICO Act focuses specifically on racketeering, and it allows for the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for the crimes which they ordered others to do or assisted them, closing a perceived loophole that allowed someone who told a man to, for example, murder, to be exempt from the trial because he did not actually do it.
RICO was enacted by section 901(a) of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (Pub.L. 91–452, 84 Stat. 922, enacted October 15, 1970). RICO is codified as Chapter 96 of Title 18 of the United States Code, 18 U.S.C. § 1961–1968. While its original use in the 1970s was to prosecute the Mafia as well as others who were actively engaged in organized crime, its later application has been more widespread.
It has been speculated that the name and acronym were selected in a sly reference to the movie Little Caesar, which featured a notorious gangster named Rico. The original drafter of the bill, G. Robert Blakey, refused to confirm or deny this.[1] G. Robert Blakey remains an expert on RICO;[2] his former student Michael Goldsmith also gained a reputation as one of the nation's leading RICO experts.[3]"

United States District Court
District of Nevada (Las Vegas)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK

District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK Court Docket February 24th 2013

District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK Court Docket February 24th 2013

District of Nevada 2:13-cv-00297-JCM-NJK 
RICO Research Links

Civil RICO: A Manual for Federal Attorneys
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/civrico.pdf


Posted Here by
Pro Se Plaintiff Crystal L. Cox