Young v. Intel Corporation et al

Filing 18

Amended Complaint.Filed by Matthew Robert Young against Intel Corporation, Steve Jobs. (Plaintiff lists Steve Jobs as a Third Party Defendant on his Amended Complaint.) (ecp)

Young v. Intel Corporation et al

Doc. 18

1
FILEn"09 JLN 17120l'C-&P

UNITED S T A T E S D I S T R I C T C O U R T FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON M A T T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG, Plaintiff, )
)

ORIGINAL

v.
INTEL CORPORATION, Defendant,

) )

Civil Action No. CV - 08 - 1496 - B R AMENDED C O M P L A I N T DEMAND F O R J U R Y T R I A L R E O U E S T EXTRODINARY H E A R I N G

)
)

)
)

v.
STEVE JOBS, T h i r d P a r t y Defendant.

) )

)
)

) ) )

CIVIL RIGHTS C O M P L A I N T B R O U G H T UNDER T I T L E 18 USC § 1028, T I T L E 15 USC § 1713 T I T L E 28 USC § 1338, § 1343, AND § 2201 C R E A T I N G A REMEDY F O R PROPERTY IN CONTROVERCY F R C P R U L E B, C, D, AND E A C T I O N I N R E M , Q U A S I I N . R E M , I N PERSONAM:i A C T I O N I N P E R S O N A M C L A I M I N G VIOLATION O F INTELLECTUAL P R O P E R T Y I N F R I N G E M E N T O F A P A T E N T A B L E INVENTION, AND C O P Y R I G H T A B L E W O R K , T R A D E S E C E R T S AND U N F A I R C O M P E T I T I O N O F T H E C O M M E R C I A L L Y VALUABLE P R O D UCT P R O S E P L A I N T I F F S E E K S O R DEMANDS C O M P E N S A T I O N O F F1VE B I L L I O N D O L L A R S [5,000,000,000.00] AND S E E K S A D E C L A R A T O R Y J U D G M E N T AND I N J U N C T I V E R E L I E F

M A T T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG Plaintiff in p r o s e SID No. 624Ui66 777 S t a n t o n B l v d O n t a r i o , O R 97914

Dockets.Justia.com

2 T H I S I S a pro se complaint, b r o u g h t u n d e r t h e l a w s governing futellectual Property Rights protected b y t h e laws implemented b y Congress to protect a category o f intangible rights p r o t e c t i n g c o m m e r c i a l l y v a l u a b l e p r o d u c t s o f the h u m a n intellect. T h e c a t e g o r y c o m p r i s e s p r i m a r i l y T r a d e m a r k , Copyright, a n d P a t e n t rights, b u t also i n c l u d e s t r a d e - s e c r e t rights, p u b l i c i t y r i g h t s , m o r a l r i g h t s , a n d r i g h t s a g a i n s t u n f a i r c o m p e t i t i o n , and a c o m m e r c i a l l y v a l u a b l e p r o d u c t o f the human intellect, i n a concrete o r abstract form, such as a copyrightable work, a protectable t r a d e m a r k , a n d a p a t e n t a b l e i n v e n t i o n , o r a t r a d e secret. T H I S c o m p l a i n t i n c o r p o r a t e s t h e a c t i o n quasi i n r e m ; a n a c t i o n b r o u g h t a g a i n s t t h e d e f e n d a n t p e r s o n a l l y , w i t h j u r i s d i c t i o n b a s e d o n a n interest i n property, t h e o b j e c t i v e b e i n g t o d e a l w i t h t h e particular p r o p e r t y o r t o s u b j e c t the property to discharge o f the claims asserted. A n d action i n rem. T h e p r e d o m i n a n t F e d e r a l S t a t u t e r e l i e d u p o n for J u r i s d i c t i o n a l g r o u n d s i n t h i s civil action is T i t l e 28 U . S . C . § 1338, with focus at [protection o f D E S I G N S } , a n d [ U n f a i r competition} COMPLAINT 1 ) P r o s e p l a i n t i f f , M a t t h e w R o b e r t Y o u n g , is a S t a t e p r i s o n e r c o n f i n e d i n t h e O r e g o n D e p a r t m e n t o f C o r r e c t i o n s , S n a k e R i v e r C o r r e c t i o n a l Institution, l o c a t e d a t 7 7 7 S t a n t o n Blvd., i n Ontario, O R 9 7 9 1 4 . P r o s e p l a i n t i f f h e r e i n i n v o k e s h i s C o n s t i t u t i o n a l R i g h t s as a C i t i z e n o f t h e United States o f America, t o b r i n g this civil action, action i n rem, i n quasi rem, i n personam, as an action i n p e r s o n a m as allowed pursuant to F R C P Rule- B , C , D , a n d E a n d further as provided b y T i t l e 28 U S C § 2201 allowing f o r the creation o f a r e m e d y in a c a s e o f a n actual controversy o v e r personal p r o p e r t y as provided b y and allowed u n d e r T i t l e 28 U S C § 1338, in t h e form o f personal intellectual p r o p e r t y t h a t i s a T r a d e S e c r e t R i g h t o f a c o m m e r c i a l l y v a l u a b l e p r o d u c t c r e a t e d from p r o s e p l a i n t i f f ' s i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o p e r t y d e s i g n o f a n a b s t r a c t p a t e n t a b l e , a n d

MATIHEW ROBERT YOUNG Plaintiff in pro Ie S I D No. 6242666 777 S t a n t o n B l v d O n t a r i o , O R 97914

3
c o p y r i g h t a b l e i n v e n t i o n a n d w o r k s . P r o s e p l a i n t i f f further c l a i m s t h a t t h e s e A c t s were c o m m i t t e d i n v i o l a t i o n o f b i s c l e a r l y established federally p r o t e c t e d C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Rights Against lawful seizure o f b i s personal property, under the F o u r t h [4t b ] , and f o u r t e e n t h [14t h ] A m e n d m e n t s t o the C o n s t i t u t i o n o f the U n i t e d States. P r o s e p l a i n t i f f s e e k s a n d d e m a n d s F i v e B i l l i o n [$5,000,000,000.00] d o l l a r s c o m p e n s a t i o n f r o m I n t e l c o r p o r a t i o n f o r r e c e i v i n g o f b i s s t o l e n p e r s o n a l property, t r a n s p o r t i n g o f m s p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y i n t h e i n t e r s t a t e commerce, t h e a i d i n g i n a c t u a l c o n c e a l i n g o f b i s p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y , a n d w i t h h o l d i n g o f s t o l e n g o o d s from t h e i r r i g h t f u l o w n e r , e v e n A F T E R I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n h a d b e e n m a d e a w a r e w i t h full k n o w l e d g e , t h a t pro s e p l a i n t i f f is the rightful owner, and original inventor o f these commercially valuable products, T h e r e f o r e p r o s e p l a i n t i f f p r a y s t h a t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t w i l l Issue a Judgment Awarding pro se p l a i n t i f f t h e sum demanded above. P r o se p l a i n t i f f notes for the p u r p o s e o f L e g a l f a c t u a l c o n t e n t i o n s t h a t t h e act o f r e c e i v i n g s t o l e n p r o p e r t y . as p r e s c r i b e d p u r s u a n t t o t h e laws u n d e r 6 6 A m . J u r . 2 d o n r e c e i v i n g s t o l e n p r o p e r t y t h a t i t is n o t n e c e s s a r y t h a t I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n b e i n m a n u a l p o s s e s s i o n o r touching o f t h e s t o l e n goods, t h a t a n y e x e r c i s i n g o f c o n t r o l o r d o m i n i o n o v e r t h e m i s s u f f i c i e n t t o c o n s t i t u t e a r e c e i v i n g . F o r t h i s cause p r o se p l a i n t i f f claims u n f a i r competition, theft o f p e r s o n a l property, c o n c e a l m e n t o f personal p r o p e r t y , fraud. a n d m o n o p o l y , a n d u n f a i r t r a d e p r a c t i c e . F o r t h i s p u r p o s e p r o s e p l a i n t i f f further seeks a n d p r a y s f o r injunctive relief, i n t h e form o f a United S t a t e s D i s t r i c t Court, restraining I n t e l C 9 r p o r a t i o n , a n d a n y o f i t s s u b s i d i a r i e s , associates, o r B u s i n e s s p a r t n e r s f r o m seeking, m a k i n g developing o r i n a n y w a y distributing f o r p r o f i t o r otherwise p u b l i c u s e , a n y t e c h n o l o g i c a l c o m p u t e r i z e d d e v i c e , application, tool, o r c o m m e r c i a l i z e p r o d u c t t h a t incorporates o r uses i n a n y w a y t h e [ C o r e - 2 D u o V i r t u a l i z e d T e c h n o l o g y ] .

M A T I H E W ROBERT YOUNG Plaintiff i n p r o lie

sm No. 6242666

777 S t a n t o n B l v d O n t a r i o , O R 97914

4
2) Pro s e p l a i n t i f f request pursuant to F R C P R u l e S4 for Judgment o f All Costs, and Court filing fees, attorney's fees, and all other c o s t and distributions that m a y incur herein. 3) This Civil Action is brought i n the United States District Court located at: United States District Court for the District of Oregon M a r k O . H a t f i e l d U.S. C o u r t h o u s e , 1000 S . W . T h i r d A v e n u e P o r t l a n d , O R 97204 a) This United States District Court has Jurisdiction to hear and decide these matters and i s s u e s i n c o n t r o v e r s y a n d t o a w a r d p r o s e p l a i n t i f f t h e a m o u n t a n d s u m s o u g h t h e r e i n p u r s u a n t to T i t l e 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 3 3 2 , § 1 3 3 7 , § 1 3 3 8 , § 1 3 4 3 , § 2 2 0 1 , § 2 2 0 2 , a n d P r o s e p l a i n t i f f r e s e r v e s the right to amend this jurisdiction pursuant t o T i t l e 28 U S C § 1653. b ) P r o s e p l a i n t i f f M a t t h e w R o b e r t Y o u n g is [ a c i t i z e n o f O r e g o n ] . T h e d e f e n d a n t I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n s i s [ a c i t i z e n o f Oregon] [ a c o r p o r a t i o n i n c o r p o r a t e d u n d e r t h e L a w s o f O r e g o n , w i t h its principle place o f business in Oregon]. T h e amount i n controversy is F i v e Billion D o l l a r s [$ 5,000,000,000.00] without interest a n d costs w h i c h exceeds the s u m o r value specified b y T i t l e 28 U.S.C. § 1332, c) Steve J o b s is a [citizen o f C a l i f o m i a ] and here after t h e filing o f this complaint, will b e omitted as a party, until such time as I n t e l c o r p o r a t i o n moves to include h i m as a third p a r t y defendant, enjoining p r o s e p l a i n t i f f i n a c a u s e r a i s i n g t h e c l a i m o f F r a u d , and material m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t to i n f o r m a t i o n n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e s t a t e m e n t o f p r o p e r t y p u r c h a s e d o r r e c e i v e d form M r . S t e v e J o b s . d ) The third p a r t y defendant Steve J o b s will hereafter b e omitted as a party, in that at this t i m e M r . J o b s [is n o t s u b j e c t t o t h i s C o u r t ' s j u r i s d i c t i o n ] a n d t h e r e f o r e c a n n o t b e m a d e a p a r t y , w i t h o u t d e p r i v i n g t h i s C o u r t o f s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h i s c a u s e o f a c t i o n , B e c a u s e to t h e
M A T I ' H E W R O B E R T YOUNG Plaintiff in p r o I e S I D No. 6 2 4 1 6 6 6 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

5 best o f pro se plaintiff's knowledge, M r . J o b s was [a resident o f the state o f California] when he defrauded Intel Corporation, about where, and from whom he actually acquired the Designs, and Schematics from, which I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n actually then developed the [Core-2 Duo, V i r t u a l Technology], from.
e) Therefore i t is I n t e l Corporation's position to enjoin p r o s e p l a i n t i f f i n a separate
action against Steve Jobs, unless this court allows I n t e l Corporation to do s o in this civil action, pursuant to L R (Local R u l e s ) 14 (a) - (a), Holding t h a t a defending party, may as a third p a r t y plaintiff, cause to be s e r v e d with Summons a n d Complaint, a person who is n o t a party, (which h e r e after S t e v e Jobs, wUI b e o m i t t e d as a Party) as a person liable f o r the p l a i n t i f fclaims against the defending party. F R C P 1 4 (a).

PLAINTIFF
4) Matthew R o b e r t Young is the plaintiff proceeding in pro se, in this civil action, Date o f b i r t h J u l y 4th 1965, place o f b i r t h Albuquerque, New Mexico. Pro se plaintiff is currently being unlawfully held and restrained o f his liberty and freedom in the Snake River Correctional Institution, which is located at 777 Stanton Blvd., Ontario, OR 97914, which subject matter is currently being brought on a separate civil action in this United States District Court, Civil No. OS.1138-PK. DEFENDANTS.
5) I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n is the liable Defendant in this civil action, and is a Corporation

within the jurisdiction o f this United States District Court, and for the purpose o f this civil action
t o be held liable o f the laws cited and raised here. I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n is considered a citizen for

the purpose o f this civil action, and made subject to liability pursuant to Title 28 USC §1332 (C)
M A ' I T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG

Plalatlff io p r o I e
S I D No. 6242666

777 Staotoa Blvd O a t a r i o , OR ' 7 ' 1 4

6 (1), and is located at 2111 N.E. 25t h Ave., H i l l s b o r o , O R 97124.

6) Steve J o b s is the third party defendant, and is in fact liable to I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , he is
Located i n C a l i f o r n i a QUESTIONS OF THE CHARACTER OF THE CLAIMS AND ADDMISSIBILITY O F T H E N A T U R E AND W E I G H T O F S U P P O R T I N G E V I D E N C E
7) Pro se p l a i n t i f f intends to bring into focus t h e central characteristics o f pro se

p l a i n t i f f s claims as t h e y are supported b y such evidence that w h e n viewed under the U n i f o n n Administration o f the Laws o f the United States, do establish themselves as factual contentions, a n d further brings them w i t h i n the scope o f these applicable Laws, as to t h e sufficiency o f the substance o f their subject matter, as the required elements needed to establish his compliant as a n appropriate pleading w i t h i n the scope, and D e s i g n o f T i t l e 28 U S C § 2201, providing that any court o f the United States, u p o n the filing o f an appropriate pleading m a y declare the rights o f t h e p a r t i e s and o t h e r l e g a l r e l a t i o n s o f a n y i n t e r e s t e d p a r t y s e e k i n g s u c h declaration. a ) P r o s e p l a i n t i f f ' s f a c t u a l c o n t e n t i o n s a r e s u c h that, at a n e v i d e n t i a r y h e a r i n g p r o s e p l a i n t i f f will prove that there exist absolutely n o opposing genuine issues o f a n y material facts to e v e n r e m o t e l y c h a l l e n g e t h e t r u t h f u l n e s s o f t h e i r p r o b a t i v e value. b ) Pro se p l a i n t i f f m a k e this declaration: [ T H A T ] , I f a n y o n e i n t h e world todtzy can

come b e f o r e t h i s Court, a t an evidentiary hearing, a n d p r e s e n t to t h i s Court a creditable challenge, (which w o u l d b e d u r i n g a n Evidentiary Hearing H e l d B e f o r e this Court, wherein A l l o f t h e parties are p r o v i d e d t i m e chance a n d t h e opportunity to prese'!t to t h i s court t h e actual applications f o r t h e s e commercially valuable products), w h i c h are known as the [ C o r e - 2
D u o M i c r o P r o c e s s o r , a n d V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y ] , allegedly i n v e n t e d b y I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , t h e n p r o s e p l a i n t i f f agrees to b e H E L D liable for the T e n T h o u s a n d D o l l a r [$10,000.00] civil
M A T l ' H E W R O B E R T YOUNG PJailltltlln p r o lie sm No. 6242666 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

7
fine fees. B u t f i r s t here is pro se plaintiff's standing upon factual contention as required i n part b y F R C P R u l e l l t which pertains to [the proprietary information, t h e a d u a l trade secrets] o f t h e true a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e [ C o r e - 2 D u o m i c r o p r o c e s s o r , a n d V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y ] t o f w h i c h

I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n only knows the potential Applications o f these Technology products t as I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n was provided b y M r . Steve JobSt a n d not it true Technological Trade Secret
Designs that will m a k e these commercially valuable Technology products w o r kt and p e r f o n n to
t h e i r f u l l e s t ability, a n d c a p a c i t i e s . c) Pro s e p l a i n t i f f is the only person i n t h e world at present who knows how to make both the [Core-2 D u o m i c r o processor, a n d t h e V i r t u a l Technology] work, a n d pro se plaintiff c a n i n fact c o m e b e f o r e t h i s U S D i s t r i c t C o u r t a n d p r o v e i t b y a f a c t u a l D E M O N S T R A T I O N . 8) P r o s e p l a i n t i f f f u r t h e r b r i n g s t h i s c i v i l a c t i o n u n d e r t h e f e d e r a l j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h i s U S District Court pursuant to the F e d e r a l Rules o f Evidence Rules 104 (a) (b) & (e), Rules 106,

201 (b) o n k i n d s o f facts, (d) w h e n m a n d a t o r y (e) o p p o r t u n i t y t o b e h e a r d a n d ( I ) time f o r t a k i n g notice; R u l e 301, 302, 401, 402 a n d 404 F R C P Rules B, C , D a n d E .
. a ) I t is p r o se plaintiff's intent to further b r i n g into focus here, t h e central ideal o f the characteristic o f pro s e p l a i n t i f f argument substantiating his claims, as t h e y are supported b y such e v i d e n c e t h a t u n d e r t h e u n i f o n n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e L a w s g o v e r n i n g t d o e s t a b l i s h h i s c l a i m s as f a c t u a l c o n t e n t i o n s t h a t a r e t h e subj e c t m a t t e r , o f t h e t y p e o f s u b s t a n c e t h a t i s r e q u i r e d i n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h t h i s c o m p l a i n t as a n a p p r o p r i a t e p l e a d i n g t h a t d e c l a r e t h e R i g h t s u n d e r t h e L a w s t h a t mandates other legal relations .. b ) P r o s e p l a i n t i f f declares h e r e t h a t t h i s a c t i o n i s a J U S T c a u s e t a n d n o t f o r h a r a s s m e n t p u r p o s e s , f u r t h e r P r o s e p l a i n t i f f m a k e s i n h i s declaration a r e q u e s t f o r t h i s U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t

M A T l ' H E W ROBERT YOUNG P l a i n t i f f In p r o s e

SID No. 6141666
777 S t a n t o n B l v d O n t a r i o , OR 97914

8
Court to H O L D a simple e x e m p l a r y test u n d e r seal o f this court, for this Court have pro se p l a i n t i f f b r o u g h t b e f o r e I t t o g i v e a D e m o n s t r a t i o n for t h i s C o u r t i n p e r s o n , e x a c t l y j u s t h o w t h e c o m p u t e r [ T e c h n o l o g y w h i c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n calls V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y t h e M i c r o P r o c e s s o r w h i c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n calls c o r e 2 - D U O ] , works and to seal this proprietary

information which pro se p l a i n t i f f will Demonstrate for this Court, to b e products that were in
fact Developed, Manufactured, and B u i l t from pro se plaintiff's personal intellectual property to w h i c h O N L Y p r o s e p l a i n t i f f ' s H o l d s t h e F U L L K n o w l e d g e o f t h e [proprietary i n f o r m a t i o n

t r a d e secret.]
c) pro s e plaintiff, further request t h a t this U n i t e d States District Court Order that I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n bring in i t ' s best and brightest engineers, Before this Court u n d e r the same sealed Hearing conditions as p r o se p l a i n t i f f i s Brought, and have anyone o f them, o r anyone in the

world, w h o I n t e l c o r p o r a t i o n c a n f i n d w h o c a n D e m o n s t r a t e f o r t h i s D i s t r i c t C o u r t , t h e A c t u a l
Application o f h o w the [ V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y o r C o r e 2 - DUO] actually works, i f t h e y (can) t h e n as stated above, u n d e r t h e federal laws governing civil actions p r o s e p l a i n t i f f (shall b~), i f h e fails to Demonstrate h i s t r a d e secret, b e held liable to the defendant(s) for T e n T h o u s a n d D o l l a r s [$10,000.00] and t o this requirement pro s e plaintiff is two hundred percent ( 2 0 0 % ) i n a g r e e m e n t w i t h this. H O W E V E R w h e n I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n F A I L S t o g i v e a D e m o n s t r a t i o n , p r o s e p l a i n t i f f D E M A N D S j u s t c o m p e n s a t i o n o f F i v e B i l l i o n d o l l a r s [$5,000,000,000.00] a n d a n y and all Patents, copyrights, Trademarks, Monies, M o n e y Contrasts, Transactions, Records

a n d a l l Documentation, A g r e e m e n t s , Trades, Stocks, Bonds, a n d a n y o t h e r business c o n d u c t e d o r e n g a g e d i n c o n c e r n i n g t h e [ C o r e 2 - D U O , a n d V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y ] and A L L
M O N E Y P R O F I T S m a d e received and profited there form, once p r o s e p l a i n t i f f demonstrates

M A T I ' H E W R O B E R T YOUNG PlaiDtift' In pl'O I e

sm No. 6242666 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

9 for this United States District Court the fact o f his Ownership as the Original Inventor o f these Technological commercially valuable products. QUESTIONS O F L m A L I T Y
9) In assessing the question o f liability pro se plaintiff first turns to the supreme law o f

the LORD GOD O F HOST, because these are in fact the very same Laws upon which this Land o f America, and the United States was founded upon and herein will further serve to clarify when a person is liable for their actions, and further establishes When they do wrong without knowing it and when they Knowingly do wrong and continues to do so with little regard for the fact that the Act or Acts o f the wrongful conduct violates the Laws governing them [Note: This
is n o t a legal argument] but rather it is pro se plaintiff's intent to bring into focus grounds upon

which relief may be Granted, and Monetary Damages Awarded, in that this is an extraordinary civil action created as allowed pursuant to Title 2 8 USC § 2201.

a) In Romans Ch. 3, v. 19 & 20 THE LORD GOD O F HOST Declares v. 19 N o w w e k n o w t h a t w h a t t h i n g s so ever t h e l a w saith, i t saith to them to t h e m who are u n d e r t h e law: t h a t every m o u t h m a y b e stopped a n d a l l t h e w o r l d m a y b e c o m e g u i l t y before God.
v. 2 0 Therefore b y t h e deeds o f t h e law there shaU n o f l e s h be j u s t i f i e d in H i s sight: f o r b y t h e law is t h e k n o w l e d g e o f sin.

b) So it follows that liability is upon to those who are under the L a w and who have knowledge o f it.

c) Intel C o r p o r a t i o n is liable to pro se plaintiff because as a citizens o f the United States, resident citizens o f the State o f Oregon, I n t e l Corporation operates and conduct i t ' s
M A ' I T H E W ROBERT Y O U N G

Plaintiff in p r o I e sm No. 6242666 777 Stanton Blvd Ontario, O R 97914

10
B u s i n e s s T r a n s a c t i o n s a n d affairs u n d e r t h e L a w s e n a c t e d b y t h e H o u s e o f C o n g r e s s o f t h e U n i t e d States, t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e S t a t e o f O r e g o n , a n d t h e O r e g o n A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Rules, and S t a t u t o r y Laws o f t h e S t a t e o f O r e g o n d ) I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , i n o r d e r t o b e incorporated, and to operate a n d conduct a n y Business Transaction o r Affairs m u s t fIrst b e Licensed, a n d Insured to do so, w i t h Knowledge a n d understanding o f t h e L a w s g o v e r n i n g Corporations a n d t h e i r Liabilities. e) Pro se p l a i n t i f f h a s i n fact communicated a n d established h i m s e l f t o I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n as t h e rightful o w n e r a n d t h e o r i g i n a l creator, i n v e n t o r o f t h e [ C o r e - 2 D u o M i c r o P r o c e s s o r ] , a n d [ V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y ] t h a t I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n has i n f a c t b e e n m a r k e t i n g a n d s e l l i n g f o r m o n e t a r y financial p r o f i t o n t h e c o m m e r c e a n d t r a d e i n t e r s t a t e c o m m e r c i a l w o r l d m a r k e t , w i t h f u l l k n o w l e d g e a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t t h e t e c h n o l o g i c a l p r o d u c t s , m e r c h a n d i s e goods, o r p r o p e r t y i n c o n t r o v e r s y d o e s i n fact b e l o n g t o p r o s e p l a i n t i f f , w i t h o u t p r o s e p l a i n t i f f ' s permission, authorization o r c o n s e n t to do so, and without e v e r o n c e p a y i n g p r o s e p l a i n t i f f a n y m o n i e s , a n d o r s h a r i n g a n y o f t h e p r o f i t s w i t h p r o s e plaintiff, o r o f f e r i n g p r o s e p l a i n t i f f a n y f o n n o fj u s t C o m p e n s a t i o n S t o c k s , B o n d s , S h a r e s , etc. STATEMENTS OF CLAIMS CAUSE OF ACTION CLAIM I 10) I n M a r c h o r A p r U o f 2 0 0 3 , p r o s e plaintiff, s e n t a c o p y o f the D e s i g n s a n d S c h e m a t i c s , o f his intellectual property, a p a t e n t a b l e invention, a n d c o p y r i g h t a b l e w o r k , to w i t ; a

H a c k e r proof, Virus p r o o / C o m p u t e r , w i t h M u l t i p h a s e Microprocessors, w h i c h p r o se p l a i n t i f f
c a l l s [ L A N C E L O T ] , f o r i t i m p e r v i o u s a b i l i t y t o b e i n g H a c k e d i n t o a n d i t s a b i l i t y t o fight o f f Viruses, to S t e v e J o b s , at A p p l e C o m p u t e r , i n California, b u t d i d n o t s e n d M r . J o b s , the

M A T I l I E W R O B E R T YOUNG Plaintiff i n p r o se

SID No. 6141666
777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

11 p r o p r i e t a r y i n f o r m a t i o n , w h i c h i s t h e Trade S e c r e t S e e A t t a c h e d E x h i b i t s M a r k e d P R O S E P L . EX. I . a ) Pro se p l a i n t i f f requested that M r . J o b s , Help and Assistance h i m i n developing and Marketing, his intellectual property patentable invention, o r b u y i t from p r o s e p l a i n t i f f for T w o H u n d r e d a n d Fifty Million D o l l a r s [$ 250,000,000.00], and that upon receiving a contractual signed agreement, then p r o s e p l a i n t i f f would agree to sent to M r . J o b s , the Proprietary

l n f o r m a t w n , t h e Trade S e c r e t s o n h o w t o m a k e t h i s c o m p u t e r T e c h n o l o g y w o r k .
b ) S t e v e J o b s , n e v e r r e p l i e d to p r o s e p l a i n t i f f . CLAIM II

11) I n t h e l a t t e r p a r t o f t h a t s a m e y e a r , 2 0 0 3 , S t e v e J o b s , t o o k p r o s e p l a i n t i f f s

i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o p e r t y p a t e n t a b l e inventions, t o I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n . T h e e x a c t n a t u r e and extent o f
t h e A g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n M r . J o b s , a n d I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n i s n o t k n o w n t o p r o s e p l a i n t i f f a t this time. a ) I t r e m a i n s h o w e v e r a fact t h a t M r . S t e v e J o b s , D e f r a u d e d I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , b y n o t totally Disclosing to, a n d Informing I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n j u s t where exactly he g o t it, and from w h o m h e a c t u a l l y d i d g e t t h e D e s i g n s a n d S c h e m a t i c s for t h e D u a l - C o r e l C o r e - 2 D u o M i c r o p r o c e s s o r , and V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y . CLAIM

m

12) I n J u n e o f 2006, I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n ' s senior vice president M r . P a t G e l s i n g e r , is s e e n b e i n g p h o t o g r a p h e d i n t h e O r e g o n i a n N e w s P a p e r , H o l d i n g i n h i s l e f t hand, a c o m p u t e r m o t h e r board, w h i c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n l a t e r t e n n e d V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y . W i t h t h e help o f E M C C o r p o r a t i o n ' s V M w a r e I n c . unit, w h o I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n p a i d T w o H u n d r e d E i g h t e e n

M A T I B E W R O B E R T YOUNG P l a i n t i f f i n p r o se

SID No. 6242666 777 Stanton Blvd
O n t a r i o , O R 97914

12 M i l l i o n Dollars,[$ 218,000,000.00) to H E L P I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , to try figure out pro se

plaintiffs proprietary information, Trade Secrets, See Attached Exhibit Marked P R O S E P L .
EX.2&6.

a) Pro se plaintiff can in fact come Before this U S District Court, and prove conclusively that the computer mother board, which M r . G e l s i n g e r , is holding in his hand, in the News Paper is in fact a product created and manufactured from pro se plaintiffs intellectual property
Design, patentable invention, o f [ L A N C E L O T ] the H a c k e r proof, Virus P r o o f computer. See

Attached Exhibits Marked P R O S E P L . E X . I . b) I n t e l c o r p o r a t i o n has publicly Announced that I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n rolled out the first dual-core microprocessor in the latter part of2005, and in that same Public Announcement, stated that I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n is seeking H E L P from universities and programmers. to H E L P
I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n [ S O L V E t h e m u l t i t h r e a d i n g ) problems that Intel cooks up. See Attached

Exhibit Marked P R O S E P L . E X . 3. This is in fact an explicit P L E A from I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n
albeit a n implicit P L E A by I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n for anyone to H E L P I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n tries to

figure out how to make this Technology work.
CLAIM IV

13) after learning that that computer microchips Grossed over T w o H u n d r e d a n d F o r t y
S i x Billion D o l l a r s [$ 246,000,000,000.00) world wide in 2006, pro se plaintiff In F e b r u a r y 2007, sent to I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n a letter o f acknowledgment and ownership o f the [ C o r e - 2 D u o P r o c e s s o r and V i r t u a l Technology), in which pro se plaintiffmade certain demands, and

placing certain restrictions, and obligations on any Letters, Response, Reply, Communiques, or interacting Missives, to which I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n did in fact, in large part complied with, which
M A T I ' H E W ROBERT YOUNG P 1 a l o t i f f in p r o I e

SID No. 6241666
771 S t a n t o n B l v d O n t a r i o , O R 97914

13 i n t u r n w a s a n A c t b y I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n e s t a b l i s h i n g t h a t I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n ' s d o e s i n fact Acknowledge that pro se plaintiff is the Rightful owner of, and original inventor and creator o f the [Dual c o r e I C o r e - 2 D u o M i c r o p r o c e s s o r , a n d t h e V i r t u a l Technology). a ) I n h i s C o m m u n i q u e to I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , P r o s e p l a i n t i f f a d d r e s s e d I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n in this manner; Dear I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n ; Does this look familiar? Well i t should. I t is the H a c k e r P r o o f , V i r u s P r o o f C o m p u t e r , t h a t I invented, w h i c h I C a l l [ L A N C E L O T ] . I s h o w e d i t to S t e v e J o b s , a t A p p l e C o m p u t e r , a n d a s k e d h i m for T w o H u n d r e d a n d F i f t y M i l l i o n D o l l a r s , h e t o o k i t to y o u a t I n t e l , a n d y o u b u i l t i t b u t y o u do not k n o w h o w to turn i t on. So here is what y o u are going to do. You are going to A g r e e t o p a y m e S e v e n t y P e r c e n t (70 % ) e v e r y t h i n g t h a t Y o u Gross O f f o f i t , a n d t h e n I w i l l tell y o u h o w t o t u m I t o n and make i t do w h a t I Designed i t to do. Y o u h a v e 3 0 d a y s t o R e s p o n d , o n B o n d e d p a p e r , with y o u r Signature written in B l u e i n k , o r I am going to s e n d copies O f m y schematics t o A M D ( A d v a n c e M i c r o Devices) a n d T e l l t h e m h o w i t w o r k s f o r n e x t to n o t h i n g . b ) I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n r e s p o n d e d e x a c t l y i n t h e m a n n e r D E M A N D E D b y p r o s e plaintiff, m e e t i n g t h e r e q u i r e d c o n d i t i o n s , a n d o b l i g a t i o n s p l a c e d o n t h e R e s p o n s e b y p r o s e plaintiff, S e e Attached Exhibit Marked P R O S E P L . E X. . c) Pro s e plaintiff request that this U. S. District Court p a y special Attention to the fact t h e e v e n though, I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n d i d n o t a g r e e t o p a y p r o s e p l a i n t i f f S e v e n t y P e r c e n t ( 7 0 % ) I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n N e v e r o n c e D e n i e d n o r e v e n t r i e d t o C h a l l e n g e p r o s e p l a i n t i f f ' s p o s i t i o n as t h e R i g h t f u l Owner, a n d O r i g i n a l C r e a t o r , a n d I n v e n t o r o f t h e D u a l - C o r e M i c r o p r o c e s s o r , a n d the C o m p u t e r m o t h e r b o a r d , l a t t e r c a l l V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y , s e e n b e i n g H e l d i n t h e h a n d o f

M A T T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG

PlaintiD' In pro se
S I D No. 6 2 4 2 6 6 6 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

15 a) According to various News Paper Publications, I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n h a s Made over F i f t y Billion D o l l a r s [$ 50,000,000,000.00) profit o f f o f pro se p l a i n t i f f s intellectual property patentable invention, w h i c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n calls [ C o r e 2, D u o P r o c e s s o r ] alone, and pro se p l a i n t i f f c a n not even guess how m u c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n has made o f f o f p r o s e p l a i n t i f f s intellectual p r o p e r t y p a t e n t a b l e invention, w h i c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n calls [ V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y ]
b ) But H E R E I S A F A C T U A L C O N T E N T I O N , A N D I S S U E A T L A W , A T

C O M M O N L A W , I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n would N O T H A V E this Money, Profits, Stocks, Bonds, a n d position as the Main supplier, a n d p r i n c i p a l p r o v i d e r o f the Worlds Computer Microchips,

H A D S t e v e Jobs N O T p r o v i d e d I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , a c o p y o f p r o s e p l a i n t i f f s I n t e l l e c t u a l
P r o p e r t y D e s i g n s , a n d S c h e m a t i c s from w h i c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n t h e n m a n u f a c t u r e d t h e D u a l C o r e M u l t i p h a s e M i c r o c h i p Processor. c ) E v e n a f t e r p r o s e p l a i n t i f f h a s C O N C L U S I V E L Y P R O V E N to I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n that h e i s in fact the Rightful Owner, a n d the Original Inventor o f this Technology, I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n continues to violate pro s e p l a i n t i f f s Constitutional, and C o m m o n L a w Rights to e n j o y t h e F r u i t s o f h i s labor, I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n i n i t s u n f a i r trade p r a c t i c e , c o n t i n u e s e v e n a f t e r b e c o m i n g aware t h a t pro s e p l a i n t i f f i s t h e r i g h t f u l o w n e r , and o r i g i n a l i n v e n t o r o f t h i s t e c h n o l o g y , k n o w i n g l y conceal, withhold, t r a n s f e r i n interstate commerce, s e l l o n t h e w o r l d c o m m e r c i a l m a r k e t for t h e s o l e p u r p o s e o f i l l e g a l l y p r o f i t i n g f r o m p r o s e p l a i n t i f f s p e r s o n a l i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o p e r t y p a t e n t a b l e inventions, and c o p y r i g h t a b l e w o r k s w i t h o u t p r o s e p l a i n t i f f s approval, authorization, c o n s e n t , and a g a i n s t p r o s e p l a i n t i f f s w a n t s a n d d e s i r e s , w i t h o u t b e i n g G r a t e f u l o r s h o w i n g a n y c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o t h e f a c t t h a t h a d i t n o t b e e n for p r o s e p l a i n t i f f ' s inteUectuaJ p r o p e r l y p a t e n t a b l e i n v e n t i o n d e s i g n s a n d s c h e m a t i c s , I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n w o u l d

M A T f B E W R O B E R T YOUNG P l a i n t i f f In p r o I e

sm No. 6242666

777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

17 I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n its subsidiaries', Business partners, Associates, and or any person or Citizen

within this Courts Jurisdiction to Order World wide from manufacturing, building, marketing, selling or otherwise pertaining to the Technology stated and mentioned in this civil action. Executed on this- t l - day o f

iJU.11 e ,2ti2!l t?ft1fk.id.- t:H.
Pro se plaintiff

MATTHEW~ERTYOUNG

-

I d e c l a r e u n d e r t h e p e n a l t y o f p e r j u r y t h a t t h e foregoing is t r u e a n d c o r r e c t t o t h e b e s t o f m y ~nowledge. Signed a n d D a t e d t h i s

MATTHEW){OBERT YOUNG

.lJ.... Day o f fVldJicil-/ ~ / - - - - - -

iJUt1

-e

M A ' I T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG PlaiatifT 10 p r o I e SID No. 6242666 7 7 7 S t a o t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n ' s s e n i o r vice pr P R O S E P L . E X . 4 & 7.

e s i d e n t M r . P a t G e l s i n g e r . S e e At tached E x h i b i t M a r k e d

14

d ) W h e n I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n replie D E M A N D E D b y p r o s e plaintiff, p

d w i t h i n T w o a n d o n e h a l f weeks, i n the m a n n e r r a t i o n a s e c o n d time, a n d y, a n d m a d e

ro se plaintiff, wrote to I n t e l C o r p o

in this Communique p r o s e p l a i n t i f f did n o t a I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , what p r o s e p l a this effect;

d d r e s s I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n s o harshl

i n t i f f b e l i e v e d t o b e a / a i r proposit i o n , w h i c h w a s s t a t e d to

Dear I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n :

P l e a s e note t h a t t h e S A M E Conditi ons apply here, 3 0 days, w i t h Your signature in B l u e i n k o n B o n d e d paper. e) I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n R e s p o n d e d j u weeks, o n B o n d e d p a p e r , w i t h t h e SEPL.EX.5,
1) Again p r o s e p l a i n t i f f Request t h

Agreement to manufacture build, and Market for me, my Computer Chip Microprocessor,[TRA D WA Y].

Thank y o u for responding in t h e Mann e r t h a t I requested, A n d since you d i d i t m a y n o t h a v e been your fault and that you m a y n o t have known that S t e v e J o b s l i e d t o you, s o h e r e i s m y O f f e r t o you, S i g n a C o n t r a c t u a l A g reement with m e where I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n will agree t o p a y m e F i f t e e n P e r c e n t (15%) O f e v e r y t h i n g t h a t you m a k e o n m y H a c k e r P r o o f , and V i r u s P r o o f Computer [ L A N C E L O T ] , a nd also sign a Contractual

s t as pro s e p l a i n t i f f Requested, wit

hin T h r e e (3)

S i g n a t u r e i n B l u e i n k . S e e Attach

ed E x h i b i t M a r k e d P R O

at this U.S. District Court p a y spec ial a t t e n t i o n t o t

he

fact t h a t A G A I N I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n o w n e r o f this Technology.

d i d n o t Challenge o r D e n y t h a t pro

se p l a i n t i f f i s the Rightful

CLAIM V

M A T I 1 I E W ROBERT YOUNG PlaiDtiff ID p r o I e sm No. ' 2 4 2 6 6 6 777 StaDtOD Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

N O T be the World lelUler in compu ter microch

16 ips Today, AMD (Advanced Micro D evices), or

Micron Technology could have just

as easily have been the World L e a d e r i

n manufacturing·

computer microchip processors with p ro se plaintiff's intellectual property p atentable inventions. See Attached Exhibit Marked P R O SE PL. EX. 7 & 10. RELIEF SOUGHT THERFORE Pursuant to the Unite d States Code Amendments cited abov e in this civil action, with emphasis at Title 28 USC § 1343 (a) (1) (2) (3), and (4), § 1338, and § 2201; This United States District Court has the A uthority and needed Jurisdiction to Re nder Judgments, and Issue Orders directed at and to the par ties here in this civil action, and to OR DER that an Extraordinary Hearing be Held, and C onducted wherein the parties must per fonn under seal record o f this U S District Court a Dem onstration o f the Actual Trade Secrets the Proprietary Infonnation pertaining to the Commer cially Valuable Products called Dual C o r e , C o r e 2 Duo Micro Processor, and the Computer T echnology called V i r t u a l Technology . M A T T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG, T he Clamant PlaintifIproceeding in pro se, DEMANDS Just Compensation Awa rds in the Sum and Amount o f Five B illion D o l l a r s , [$ 5,000,000,000.00] for the Wlautho rized use and profits made from pro se plaintiff's intellectual personal property patentab le invention, and copyrightable works . Pro se plaintiff further DEMANDS Co mpensatory Awards o f ALL o f the Pat ents, Copyrights, Trademarks, Proceeds Mo nies, Stocks, Bonds, Securities, and C ontracts, Agreements, and any and ALL Busine ss DEALS made generated and or agr eed to i n regards to the Commercially Valuable Products c alled Core 2 Duo, and Virtual Techno logy. Pro se plaintiff Request that this Unite d States Court Issue and Injunction pr ohibiting
M A T T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG Plaintiff In p r o I e 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914

SID No. 6242666

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE CASE NAME: \y\~\!CW CASE N U M B E R : ( i f mown)

RECIJD'09 JlJ.I1712:4)r)DC~

~. YOlJ.Ni1 - v. \~ e\ ~ ~~OtO\\\ 0 I l t\1-01 ~ J 4qCo - ~'-----_---=-

_

COMES NOW,

S\a..4'he w t . YOUt11

' and certi$es the following:
s1a-o..)...o"

'UJ.?t I ani incar ~rated- by the Oregon-Department at Corrections at 7 i 7 \~\" - On O\:r-\ - 0 C\ 1 Q l

That on the ~day of Ufl 2 0 . 4 L , I personally pl~ed i n the Correctional Institution)s rnaiJing service A TRUE C O p y o f the following:

'J" e .

,

. I placed the above in a securely enclosed, postage prepaid envelope, to the person(s) named at the places addressed. below:

~1-<:~~
(Signature) . -

Page 1 o f 1 -certificate o f Service

Form 03.015