Saturday, June 19, 2010

Former Clinton and Obama budget adviser Franklin Raines owns a key carbon-emissions patent he developed as CEO of the Fannie Mae

" Disgraced Fannie Mae CEO set to cash in for millions

Former Clinton and Obama budget adviser Franklin Raines owns a key carbon-emissions patent he developed as CEO of the government-sponsored mortgage giant Fannie Mae, positioning him and his partners to make millions of dollars if it is used in any carbon-capping scheme implemented by the Obama administration.

Franklin Raines and his associates led Fannie Mae and Congress to believe Fannie Mae owned the patent, despite public records to the contrary, a WND investigation has found.

Franklin Raines and his partners carried out their plan by quietly filing for and receiving a second nearly identical carbon-emissions patent that superseded the first patent, according to government records. The second patent was never assigned to Fannie Mae or any other party.

As WND reported, an Enron-like accounting scandal enabled Raines to earn $90 million in his five years as Fannie Mae CEO, from 1999 to 2004. Raines and his associates applied for the first patent, U.S. Patent No. 6904336, entitled "System and Method for Residential Emissions Trading," Nov. 8, 2002, while Franklin Raines was Fannie Mae CEO. The first patent was issued June 7, 2005.

In three separate assignments made in April and July 2004, Raines and his associates assigned the first patent to Fannie Mae and to CantorCO3e, a London- and San Francisco-based international company self-described as "a leading global provider of financial services to the world's environmental and energy markets."

Carlton Bartels, the chief executive of Wall Street trading and investment firm Cantor Fitzgerald and head of the spin-off CantorCO3e organization, was one of Franklin Raines' partners listed as an "inventor" and co-owner of the patent.

On Dec. 21, 2004, Franklin Raines accepted "early retirement" as Fannie Mae CEO while Securities and Exchange Commission investigators pursued their inquiry into accounting irregularities under Franklin Raines' management.

On April 28, 2005, Franklin Raines and his partners, including Bartels, applied for a second carbon emissions patent issued Nov. 7, 2006, as U.S. Patent No. 7133750.

The second patent was nearly identical to the first. Only a few sentences in the claims were modified, making the substantive meaning and intent of the second patent no different than the first.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office records make clear that the second patent was never assigned to any other party, meaning Franklin Raines and the other individuals listed on the patent as "inventors" retained all ownership rights.

Rader, Fishman & Grauer PLLC, the law firm serving as attorney to Franklin Raines and his partners for the second patent, told WND client-attorney privilege prevented the law firm from commenting.

Franklin Raines could not be reached for comment.

Patent office explains

Jennifer Rankin Byrne, spokeswoman for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, explained to WND regarding the two patents that "one application is a continuation of the other," such that the two patents are "essentially for the same invention."

"Basically – the second patent is what's called a 'continuation' of the first application," she explained in an e-mail to WND.
"What this means is that this is a second application for the same invention claimed in a prior application and filed before the original application becomes abandoned or granted. Sometimes the continuation application will have additional claims beyond what was included in the original application, or improvements to the invention in the original application."

Rankin Byrne confirmed the second patent superseded the first patent.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office extension division confirmed to WND there was no record of any assignments for the second patent and that assignments made for the first patent do not automatically carry forward to the second.

Fannie Mae Misled ?

In response to a WND inquiry, Fannie Mae spokeswoman Janis L. Smith referred WND to a May 25 letter sent by Fannie Mae general counsel Alfred M. Pollard to Reps. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

In the letter, Pollard explained that the first patent "was granted on June 7, 2005, to Fannie Mae and a joint owner, LLC."

Pollard's letter appears aimed at explaining to Issa and Chaffetz why Fannie Mae was pursuing a carbon-emissions patent, an issue apparently outside the authority of the mortgage government-sponsored entity.

Pollard, apparently unaware of the second patent, made no reference to it in the letter.

Moreover, Pollard's letter implies Franklin Raines was acting in his capacity as Fannie Mae CEO when he applied for the patents, since the language of the letter makes no distinction between Franklin Raines and Fannie Mae applying for the patents.

"In filing the patent application, Fannie Mae did not intend to enter the energy trading business," Pollard explained to Congress.
"Residential emission trading, if developed in the market, would be conducted by others in the financial industry or other subject matter experts.
Similarly, Fannie Mae did not pursue a patent out of a desire for potential royalties, but instead with the hope it could help facilitate the implementation by others of its original concept that residential builders could leverage their investments in building energy efficient houses."

He continued, writing as if Fannie Mae and were the patent applicants, listed as "inventors," rather than third parties that received a beneficial interest in the patent through an assignment process: "Fannie Mae and LLC opted to protect this business method through the joint filing of a patent application to allow the concept to be implemented by industry participants without their having to fear patent and royalty claims by others, should others obtain a patent on the concept if Fannie Mae and LLC did not."

Contrary to these representations, Fannie Mae and are not listed as applicants or inventors on either patent.

Issa and Chaffetz did not respond to a WND request for comment. Issa's office said it is aware of the story and is looking into it.

Franklin Raines at Fannie Mae

As WND reported, Franklin Raines and two other top Fannie Mae executives agreed to pay $24.7 million, including a $2 million fine, to settle a civil lawsuit filed in December 2006 accusing them of manipulating Fannie Mae earnings, allowing executives to pocket hundreds of millions in bonuses from 1998 to 2004.

Franklin Raines was forced to give up Fannie Mae stock options valued at $15.6 million as part of the settlement.

On July 17, 2008, the the Washington Post ran a profile piece on Franklin Raines stating he "has been quietly constructing a new life for himself" in which he takes "calls from Barack Obama's presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters."

Prior to the settlement, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, known as OFHEO, the government regulator that oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, had sought $100 million against Franklin Raines and the other two executives, plus restitution totaling more than $115 million in bonus money tied to the accounting scheme.

Fannie Mae separately paid a $400 million civil fine in a settlement with OFHEO and the SEC in an agreement to make top-to-bottom changes in its accounting procedures to avoid future accounting scandals.

The SEC accused Fannie Mae under Franklin Raines' leadership of misstating earnings for three and a half years, leading to an estimated $9 billion earnings restatement that wiped out 40 percent of Fannie Mae's profits from 2001-2004, according to Business Week.

Central to the Franklin Raines accounting scandal was a strategy to "cook the books" of Fannie Mae to show the type of earnings that would trigger hundreds of millions of bonuses to Raines and other key Fannie Mae executives.

When the scandal surfaced, Franklin Raines resigned from Fannie Mae in December 2004 with a $19 million severance package.

Fannie Mae accounting manager Roger Barnes charged that the mortgage giant had been manipulating its earnings through "cookie jar" accounting to justify payment of hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses to top executives.

In his 26-page testimony before OFHEA, Barnes detailed multiple Fannie Mae deviations from Generally Accepted Accounting Practices and his repeated efforts to bring the irregularities to a wide range of Fannie Mae managers and executives, all without positive result.

Barnes said he left Fannie Mae in October 2003 because he felt "forced out" once Fannie Mae excluded him from working on the OFHEA investigation.

"As a result of Fannie Mae's refusals to take the concerns I had raised about financial and accounting practices seriously, and the retaliation I faced for raising these concerns, I had no choice to but to separate from the Company in October 2003," Barnes said on page 25 of his written October 6, 2004, testimony to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services.

Still, the OFHEA report on the Franklin Raines scandal cited Barnes 34 times in the first 80 pages of the 200-page document.

Barnes, an African American, reportedly received a $1 million settlement after threatening a whistleblower lawsuit charging racial discrimination, according to USA Today.

Sub-Prime Housing

WND also reported that despite having served as Fannie Mae chief executive officer, Raines was named in a housing scandal as one of the "Friends of Anthony" in a low-income mortgage deal arranged by Anthony Mozilo, the former chief executive of the now-bankrupt sub-prime mortgage broker Countrywide Financial Corp.

Franklin Raines was also a repeat customer at Countrywide while he was Fannie Mae chief executive, receiving four home loans between 1999 and 2003 totaling nearly $4 million.

One of Franklin Raines' properties included a 98-year-old seven-bedroom stucco colonial with a pool, a movie theater and a shared tennis court, overlooking a national park. "

Source of Post

Why Does the USPTO give such amazingly Conflict of Interest "Patents" - surely they know what is going on.. Who at the United States Patent Office is part of the Wall of Corruption with the giving or the denying of US Patents to the Legitimate "Inventors"?

Why are Folks like Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines given Patents and yet Inventors such as Eliot Bernstein of Iviewit Technologies are denied that same legal right for over a decade now?

Well to me it seems to reason that the Big Players are benefiting from crooked deals, insider knowledge, cover ups and the residual Billions year after year on Patents and doing this by the Corruption in the United States Patent Office enabled by the United States Supreme Court, the State Attorney Bar and Ethics Committees in multiple states and many of the Top Law Firms.. .. all enabling what looks like Stock Fraud, Shareholder Fraud, Deception and Crooked Deals with Liability Carriers and an Endless array of Cover Ups and Side Deals to create revenue from Technology that somehow displaces who really owns the Technology to put the Technology in the hands of those who can get it to where it needs to be to make the most money for those Billionaire CEOs and those Major Internatonal Law Firms Such as Proskauer Rose.

How many "investors" do you think will Make Billions from this seeming Patent Scandal of Franklin Raines ?

I mean there must be patent attorneys and government agents in on this one from the start.. and if you look deep enough I bet you Find Curtis Lu who was also at Fannie Mae at One Time and is Now at Time Warner Inc. Curtis Lu is involved NOW in the Trillion Dollar Stolen Patent Scandal of the Iviewit Technologies Company.

Curtis Lu Time Warner Inc. knows that the Time Warner Inc. Shareholders have been misled for a Decade now and Curtis Lu Time Warner Inc. knows that the Iviewit Techologies company has signed contracts and licensing agreement, as well as confidentiality agreements with the Iviewit Company, and that these Contracts with iViewit were NOT honored by Time Warner inc. ..... and Yet Curtis Lu Time Warner Inc. is simply ignoring this Massive Shareholder Fraud, and so is Time Warner CEO Jeffrey Bewkes.

See Curtis Lu was at Fannie Mae, Proskauer Rose is also Connected to Fannie Mae... Proskauer Rose Patent Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein and Proskauer Rose Attorney Christopher C. Wheeler were instrumental in Stealing the Iviewit Technologies from the Iviewit Technologies Company and Pooling this Patent Illegally in MPEG LA Patent Pools..

Oh and an "Enron Like "Accounting Scandal" - Well Proskauer Rose WITH the dirty deals surrounding the Iviewit Technologies Theft... Proskauer brought down Enron.. and was part of the "Enron Scandal" So looks like the Patent Stealing Fraternity Strikes Again and Again .. and that the Shareholders of Major Tech and Media Companies as well as Taxpayers pay the price for the Making the RICH Richer Patent Scandal Party...

So it is Obvious to me that this Patent Scandal Conspiracy over at the USPTO has been going on for quite some time and it looks like the PAY is Billions a Year for those Involved.. not to mention what the "investors" get from insider trading and other secret deals we can only speculate on that Obvious Pay Off..

More on the Iviewit Stolen Technology and Denied Patent and the Multi - Trillion Dollar Lawsuit that innocent Shareholders will one day pay for.. go to and www.Iviewit.TV ..
Franklin Raines Got 19 Million in Severance Pay.. from Fannie Mae ???
Are you Kidding me.. Crimes On Top of Corruption and it all Pays SOooo good on they way up and looks like even pays more on the way out... and don't think that Proskauer Rose and Curtis Lu are not in on this Money.. Look Deep Folks.. this Wall of Corruption is very VERY High..

Posted Here by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger....