The 20 documents which comprise my 152 page (denied) appeal

I wrote a 150 page appeal to the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals. It was rushed, but it got accepted in 1 day, but was denied by the Judges two days later. The goal was to get a temporary stay of the rushed proceedings which stopped me from deposing the people I was suing ("named defendants") and to allow me to continue discovery, and to instruct the lower court judge to look into my Witness Tampering allegation.

The amazingly bad thing is where I was not permitted to depose people until I was first deposed (July 8, 2009), and then all depositions were closed on Fri July 31, 2009. Even the "named defendants" Bob and Heather were not deposed though I had asked IBM for assurances that I could, and they said "sure" as long as I was deposed first. I even asked IBM's lawyer Kevin Lauri of JacksonLewis on Wed July 29 about getting those two IBM'ers deposed, and he refused to give me a date when I could depose them (e.g. Thu/Fri Jul 30-31 would have worked). In fact, Kevin said "our settlement conference is on August 6, which might end this case, so I won't give you dates for the depositions until after Aug. 6" . That's bad faith, since Kevin said on July 31 that it was too late to depose anyone, and on Aug 6, he refused (again) to even answer when I talked to him after the Settlement Conference. There oughta be a law against that....

And I felt IBM did some witness tampering (details upon request), but IBM would not comment on their motives for contacting all of my witnesses and giving not just the lawyer's view on whether the witnesses could talk to me, but "IBM's opinion" (I note that IBM is not a law firm, and even if it were, as far as I know, it is illegal to give legal advice to people who may already have lawyers -- conflict of interest).

Such is life.

But I present here the document, with an index below, that hopefully is hyperlinked in a good way (right now, I'm a newbie, and it's kinda cumbersome).

The juicy parts are #2 and #11.

I asked Magistrate Judge Eaton's chamber to put the "IBM lied" document #11 on Pacer to give to the NY Times, and the clerks said "Sure, just send a clean copy without fax marks," which I then did by overnight fedex. However, when it was not online after a week, I asked what was wrong, and the Judge's clerks said I should do it myself (put it on Pacer by myself, which I can't do -- Pacer is the Public Access to Courts Electronic Retrieval). They said people can get it by coming to the Court House and photocopying it. That's hardly electronic. I wonder what made MJ Eaton change his mind?

I have an version that's in color in Excel, but I couldn't get it to work right.

Documents which made up my (denied) appeal:

1. T 1080

2. 20 page Appeal for a Temporary Stay and a Writ of Mandamus

3. This index

4. Scholarly article on 18 USC§1512 Witness Tampering

5. MJ Eaton Standing Order for Settlement - November 3rd, 2008 & 10/31/2005

6. Document #67 Nov 12, 2008 Order of USDJ Sullivan on depositions (signed 11/11/2008)

7. Exhibit B1 in full: IBM June 5, 2009 Response to Motion to Compel IBM to produce emails 20 pages

8. June 10, 2009 Letter with proposed agreements of Lauri on third party subpoenas

9. Document #79 USDJ Sullivan order of 6/16 or 6/18/2009

10. Document #77 MJ Eaton order of June 16, 2009 with Discovery ending of July 31, 2009

11. Appendix E: Lindner letter of June 17, 2009 on witness tampering: "IBM Lied" 21 pages

12. Document #80 MJ Eaton Memo + Order of 6/18/2009

13. Cover Letter to SDNY Chief Judge Preska 7/2/2009

14. Plaintiff affidavit of 7/9/2009 10 pages

15. 7/10/2009 Lindner reply to IBM Response to Motion to Compel 20 pages

16. 7/13/2009 Lindner letter asking intent for alleged witness tampering

17. MJ Eaton order #96 of 7/23/2009 affirming order of 6/16/2009 for 7/31/09 deadline

18. MJ Eaton Standing Order on Discovery Disputes 7/29/2008; revised 5/7/08

19. 2nd Affidavit for Extension of Discovery 7/31/09

20. Document 98 USDJ Order of Aug 5, 2009

21. Motion Information Statement

22. Affirmation of Service to Second Circuit Court of Appeals

US Court of Appeals rejects a temporary stay

Well, I'm nothing if not persistent. I was upset that IBM deliberately stopped me from deposing the "named defendants" (Heather & Bob) in my case against them, even though they were ordered by the USDJ Sullivan [item 7(c)(ii) on Nov 12, 2008] and that IBM agreed to that after I was deposed, but when I asked them make "Heather and Bob" available, IBM refused.

So, I asked the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the end of discovery so that this could be done. Those judges rejected my appeal. Oh, did I say a lawyer pal of mine said I had a 1% chance the Court of Appeals would agree with me.

Would IBM try to blackmail me, in addition to witness tampering?

Gee, (or more specifically, Golly Gee), would an upright firm such as IBM attempt to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1512 on witness tampering? That means, would IBM try to contact all of my witnesses in an attempt to influence them to delay testimony or withhold records? I think so. But when I asked IBM what their intent on writing my witnesses, IBM refused to answer.

And IBM deposed me under oath, and asked me questions about my, how shall I phrase this, about my nether regions. (Hey, this is a PG-13 rated blog.) That's mean. And worse: they made me sign a document about keeping things secret, and that same year, they break the secrecy with me under oath. Sort of liking trying to get answers so that they can blackmail me with it later.

Say it ain't so, IBM.

But, specifically IBM, say it ain't so by providing the reason Kevin Lauri of Jackson Lewis, partner in NYC, asked those three (plus) questions on what I would hope would be off-limit questions.