Young v. Intel Corporation et al

Filing 19

Amended Complaint.Filed by Matthew Robert Young against Intel Corporation. (ljl)

Download PDF
Young v. Intel Corporation et al Doc. 19 1 FIL8'09 JLN 22 i3:35!.lSDC{~P ORIGINAL UNITED STATES D I S T R I C T C O U R T FORTBE DISTRICT OF OREGON M A T T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG, Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. CV - 08 - 1 4 9 6 - DR 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 HEARING v. I N T E L CORPORATION, Defendant, ) ) ) ) ) ) v. STEVE JOBS, T h i r d P a r t y Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) C I V I L RIGHTS COMPLAINT 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 , QUASI I N R E M , I N P E R S O N A M , A C T I O N I N P E R S O N A M CLAIMING 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 PATENTABLE 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 U C T 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 F I V E B I L L I O N DOLLARS [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 r H E W ROBERT YOUNG Plaintiff In p r o Ie S I D No. 6242666 777 Stanton B l v d Ontario, O R 97914 Dockets.Justia.com 2 T H I S I S a p r o se c o m p l a i n t , b r o u g h t u n d e r t h e l a w s g o v e r n i n g I n t e l l e c t u a l P r o p e r t y Rights protected b y the 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 t h e 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 , C o p y r i g h t , and P a t e n t r i g h t s , b u t a l s o i n c l u d e s t r a d e - s e c r e t r i g h t s , p u b l i c i t y r i g h t s , m o r a l rights, 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 , a n d 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 h u m a n 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 rem; an action brought against the defendant personally, with jurisdiction based o n an interest i n property, the objective b e i n g to deal with the particular property o r to subject 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 c i v i l a c t i o n is T i t l e 28 U.S.C. 1338, with focus at (Protection o fDESIGNS), and [Unfair competition) COMPLAINT 1 ) P r o se p l a i n t i f f , M a t t h e w R o b e r t Young, i s 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 I n s t i t u t i o n , l o c a t e d a t 777 S t a n t o n B l v d . , i n Ontario, O R 97914. P r o s e plaintiff herein invokes his Constitutional Rights as a Citizen o f the U n i t e d S t a t e s o f A m e r i c a , t o b r i n g t h i s c i v i l a c t i o n , a c t i o n i n rem, i n q u a s i r e m , i n p e r s o n a m , a s an action i n personam as allowed pursuant to F R C P R u l e B, C , D, and E a n d further as provided b y T i t l e 28 U S C 2201 allowing for the creation o f a remedy i n a case o f a n actual controversy o v e r p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y a s p r o v i d e d b y and a l l o w e d u n d e r T i t l e 2 8 U S C 1 3 3 8 , i n t h e f o r m o f 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 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 commerciaUy v a l u a b l e p r o d u c t c r e a t e d f r o m 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 , and MATIHEW ROBERT YOUNG Plaintiff i n p r o I e S I D N o . 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 works. P r o se p l a i n t i f f f u r t h e r c l a i m s t h a t t h e s e A c t s w e r e c o m m i t t e d i n v i o l a t i o n o f h i s clearly established federally p r o t e c t e d Constitutional R i g h t s Against lawful seizure o f his personal property, u n d e r the F o u r t h [4t b ] , and f o u r t e e n t h [14t b] A m e n d m e n t s t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e 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 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ] 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 for r e c e i v i n g o f h 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 his 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 c o m m e r c e , 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 h 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 goods from t h e i r rightful owner, e v e n A F f E R Intel Corporation had b e e n m a d e aware with full knowledge, that p r o 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 e s e 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 , 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 J u d g m e n t A w a r d i n g p r o s e p l a i n t i f f t h e s u m d e m a n d e d a b o v e . P r o s e p l a i n t i f f n o t e s for t h e purpose o f Legal factual contentions t h a t the act o f receiving stolen property, as prescribed pursuant to the laws under 66 Am. J u r . 2 d o n receiving stolen property that i t is not necessary 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 t o u c h i n g o f the s t o l e n g o o d s , t h a t a n y exercising o f control o r dominion over them is sufficient to constitute a receiving. F o r this cause p r o se p l a i n t i f f claims u n f a i r c o m p e t i t i o n , t h e f t o f p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y , c o n c e a l m e n t o f p e r s o n a l property, fraud, and monopoly, and unfair trade practice. For this purpose pro se p l a i n t i f f further seeks and prays for injunctive relief, i n the form o f a United States District Court, restraining I n t e l C o 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 , a s s o c i a t e s , o r B u s i n e s s p a r t n e r s from s e e k i n g , m a k i n g d e v e l o p i n g o r i n a n y w a y d i s t r i b u t i n g f o r p r o f i t o r o t h e r w i s e p u b l i c use, 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 device, a p p l i c a t i o n , t o o l , 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 i n c o r p o r a t e s o r u s e s 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 Technology]. M A T T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG P l a i n t i f f In p r o I e SID No. 6142666 777 S t a n t o n Blvd 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 Rule 54 for Judgment o f All Costs, a n d Court filing fees, a t t o r n e y ' s fees, a n d all other c o s t a n d distributions that m a y incur herein. 3 ) This Civil Action is brought i n the United States District C o u r t located at: United States District C o u r t f o r t h e District o f Oregon M a r k O. Hatfield U.S. C o u r t h o u s e , 1000 S.W. T h i r d Avenue P o r t l a n d , O R 97204 a ) T h i s 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 h a s J u r i s d i c t i o n to h e a r a n d d e c i d e t h e s e m a t t e r s a n d i s s u e s i n c o n t r o v e r s y a n d t o award 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 t o Title 28 U.S.C. 1332, 1337, 1338, 1343, 2201, 2202, and Pro se p l a i n t i f f reserves the right to amend this j u r i s d i c t i o n pursuant to Title 28 USC 1653. b ) P r o se 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 i s [ a c i t i z e n o f Oregon]. 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 i t s p r i n c i p l e p l a c e o f b u s i n e s s i n O r e g o n ] . T h e a m o u n t i n c o n t r o v e r s y i s F i v e Billion Dollars [$ 5,000,000,000.00] without interest and costs w h i c h exceeds t h e s u m o r value specified b y Title 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 h e r e after the filing o f this complaint, will b e o m i t t e d as a p a r t y , u n t i l s u c h t i m e a s I n t e l c o r p o r a t i o n m o v e s t o i n c l u d e h i m as a t h i r d p a r t y defendant, e n j o i n i n g pro se 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 , a n d m a t e r i a l misrepresentation w i t h respect to information n o t included i n the statement o f property p u r c h a s e d o r r e c e i v e d f o n n M r . Steve J o b s . d) T h e third party defendant Steve J o b s will hereafter b e omitted as a party, i n 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 therefore c a n n o t b e m a d e a party, without depriving this C o u r t o f subject matter jurisdiction i n this cause o f action, Because to the 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 s e SID No. 6%41666 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97!H4 5 b e s t o f p r o se p l a i n t i f f ' s k n o w l e d g e ~ M r . J o b s w a s [ a r e s i d e n t o f t h e s t a t e o f California] w h e n h e 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 , a b o u t w h e r e , a n d from w h o m h e a c t u a l l y a c q u i r e d t h e Designs~ and 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 actually t h e n developed t h e [ C o r e - 2 D u o , V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y ] , from. e) Therefore it 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 in a separate action against Steve Jobs, unless this court allows I n t e l Corporation to do so in this civil action, p u r s u a n t to L R ( L o c a l R u l e s ) 1 4 (a) - (a), Holding that a defending party, m a y a s a third p a r t y p l a i n t i f t cause to b e s e r v e d with Summons a n d Complaint, a p e r s o n who is n o t a party, (which h e r e a f t e r S t e v e Jobs, w i l l b e o m i t t e d a s a P a r t y ) a s a p e r s o n l i a b l e f o r t h e p l a i n t i f f claims against the defending party. F R C P 1 4 (a). PLAINTIFF 4) M a t t h e w R o b e r t Y o u n g is the plaintiff proceeding i n pro se, i n this civil action, D a t e o f b i r t h J u l y 4 tb 1 9 6 5 , p l a c e o f b i r t h A l b u q u e r q u e , New M e x i c o . P r o s e p l a i n t i f f is currently b e i n g u n l a w f u l l y h e l d a n d r e s t r a i n e d o f h i s l i b e r t y a n d freedom i n t h e S n a k e R i v e r C o r r e c t i o n a l I n s t i t u t i o n , w h i c h i s l o c a t e d at 7 7 7 S t a n t o n B l v d . , Ontario~ O R 97914, w h i c h s u b j e c t m a t t e r i s c u r r e n t l y b e i n g b r o u g h t o n a s e p a r a t e c i v i l a c t i o n i n t h i s 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 , C i v i l No. 08-1138-PK. DEFENDANTS 5) I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n is the liable Defendant i n this civil action, and is a Corporation w i t h i n t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h i s 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 , a n d for t h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s c i v i l a c t i o n to b e 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 T i t l e 28 U S C 1332 ( C ) M A T T H E W ROBERT YOUNG PlalntltT In p r o I e sm No. 6 M 2 " ' 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , OR 97914 6 ( 1 ) , a n d i s l o c a t e d a t 2 1 1 1 N . E . 2 5 Ave., H i l l s b o r o , O R 9 7 1 2 4 . 6 ) S t e v e J o b s i s t h e t h i r d p a r t y d e f e n d a n t , a n d i s i n fact l i a b l e t o I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , h e i s L o c a t e d i n California. tb Q U E S T I O N S O F T H E C H A R A C T E R O F T H E C L A I M S AND A D D M I S S I B I L I T Y 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 p r o s e p l a i n t i f f s c l a i m s as t h e y a r e s u p p o r t e d b y s u c h e v i d e n c e t h a t w h e n v i e w e d 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 o f t h e U n i t e d States, d o e s t a b l i s h t h e m s e l v e s a s factual c o n t e n t i o n s , a n d f u r t h e r b r i n g s t h e m w i t h i n t h e s c o p e o f t h e s e a p p l i c a b l e L a w s , as t o t h e s u f f i c i e n c y o f t h e s u b s t a n c e o f t h e i r s u b j e c t m a t t e r , as t h e r e q u i r e d e l e m e n t s n e e d e d t o e s t a b l i s h h i s c o m p l i a n t as a n a p p r o p r i a t e p l e a d i n g w i t h i n t h e s c o p e , a n d D e s i g n o f T i t l e 28 U S C 2201, p r o v i d i n g t h a t a n y c o u r t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , u p o n t h e filing o f a n a p p r o p r i a t e p l e a d i n g m a y d e c l a r e t h e r i g h t s o f t h e p a r t i e s a n d o t h e r legal relations 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 factual c o n t e n t i o n s a r e s u c h t h a t , 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 w i l l p r o v e t h a t t h e r e e x i s t a b s o l u t e l y n o o p p o s i n g g e n u i n e i s s u e s o f a n y m a t e r i a l facts t o 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 ) P r o s e p l a i n t i f f m a k e t h i s declaration: [ T H A T ] , I f a n y o n e i n t h e w o r l d t o d a y c a n c o m e b e / o r e t h i s Court, a t a n e v i d e n t i a r y h e a r i n g , a n d p r e s e n t t o t h i s C o u r t a c r e d i t a b l e challenge, (which w o u l d b e d u r i n g a n E v i d e n t i a r y H e a r i n g H e l d B e / o r e this Court, wherein A l l 0 / t h e p a r t i e s a r e p r o v i d e d t i m e c h a n c e a n d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to p r e s e n t to t h i s c o u r t t h e a c t u a l a p p l i c a t i o n s / o r t h e s e c o m m e r c i l l l l y v a l u a b l e p r o d u c t s ) , w h i c h a r e k n o w n as 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 Technology], allegedly invented b y I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , then pro se 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 T H E W R O B E R T YOUNG P l a i a t l f r in p r o I e SID No. 624~6 777 S t a n t o n B l v d O n t a r i o , O R 97914 7 fine fees. B u t f l r s t here is p r o se p l a i n t i f f s standing upon factual contention as required in part b y F R C P R u l e 11, w h i c h pertains to [the proprietary information, t h e a c t u a l trade secrets] o f t h e true application 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 ] , o f w h i c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n o n l y k n o w s t h e p o t e n t i a l A p p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e s e T e c h n o l o g y p r o d u c t s , as I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n w a s p r o v i d e d b y M r . S t e v e J o b s , a n d n o t i t t r u e T e c h n o l o g i c a l Trade S e c r e t D e s i g n s t h a t w i l l m a k e these c o m m e r c i a l l y v a l u a b l e T e c h n o l o g y p r o d u c t s w o r k , a n d p e r f o n n t o t h e i r f u l l e s t a b i l i t y , a n d capacities. c) Pro se p l a i n t i f f is t h e o n l y person in the world at present who knows h o w to make b o t h 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 t h e V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y ] w o r k , a n d p r o se p l a i n t i f f 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 D i s t r i c t C o u r t p u r s u a n t t o t h e F e d e r a l R u l e s o f E v i d e n c e R u l e s 1 0 4 ( a ) ( b ) & (e), R u l e s 1 0 6 , 2 0 1 ( b ) o n k i n d s o C f a d s , ( 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 ( t ) t i m e f o r t a k i n g n o t i c e ; R u l e 3 0 1 , 3 0 2 , 4 0 1 , 402 a n d 4 0 4 F R C P R u l e s B , C , D a n d E . a ) I t i s p r o s e p l a i n t i f f s i n t e n t t o f u r t h e r b r i n g i n t o focus h e r e , t h e c e n t r a l i d e a l o f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f p r o s e p l a i n t i f f a r g u m e n t s u b s t a n t i a t i n g h i s c l a i m s , as t h e y a r e s u p p o r t e d b y s u c h evidence that under the u n i f o n n administration o f the Laws governing, do establish his claims as factual c o n t e n t i o n s t h a t a r e t h e s u b j 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 o t h e r 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 , 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 d e c l a r a t i o n a r e q u e s t for 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 I H E W R O B E R T YOUNG P l a i n t i f f In p r o I e SID No. 6242666 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914 8 Court to H O L D a simple e x e m p l a r y test under 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 [Technology w h i c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n c a l l s 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 Processor which I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n calls core 2 - DUO], works and to seal this proprietary i n f o r m a t i o n which pro se plaintiff will Demonstrate for this Court, to be products that were i n fact Developed, Manufactured, and Built from pro se p l a i n t i f f 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 se plaintiff, further request that this United States District Court Order that I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n b r i n g i n i t ' s b e s t a n d b r i g h t e s t engineers, B e f o r e t h i s C o u r t u n d e r t h e s a m e s e a l e d Hearing conditions as pro se plaintiff is Brought, and have anyone o f t h e m , o r anyone in the world, who Intel c o r p o r a t i o n c a n find who can Demonstrate for this District Court, the Actual Application o f h o w the [Virtual Technology o r C o r e 2 - DUO] actually works, i f t h e y (can) then as stated above, under the federal laws governing civil actions pro se plaintiff (shall be), i f h e fails to Demonstrate his trade secret, b e h e l d liable to the defendant(s) for T e n T h o u s a n d Dollars 1510,000.00] and to this requirement pro se plaintiff is two hundred percent (200%) i n agreement with this. H O W E V E R when I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n F A I L S to give a Demonstration, pro s e p l a i n t i f f DEMANDS j u s t compensation o f Five Billion dollars 155,000,000,000.00] and any a n d all P a t e n t s , c o p y r i g h t s , T r a d e m a r k s , M o n i e s , M o n e y C o n t r a s t s , T r a n s a c t i o n s , R e c o r d s a n d a l l D o c u m e n t a t i o n , A g r e e m e n t s , Trades, Stocks, B o n d s , a n d a n y o t h e r b u s i n e s s c o n d u c t e d o r e n g a g e d i n concerning the [Core 2 - DUO, and V i r t u a l Technology] and ALL MONEY P R O F I T S made received and profited there form, once pro se p l a i n t i f f demonstrates M A T I B E W ROBERT YOUNG Plaintiff In p r o se S I D No. 6 2 4 2 6 6 6 777 S t a n t o n B l v d 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 LIBALITY 9) In assessing the question o f liability pro se plaintiff first turns to the supreme law o f the L O R D G O D O F H O S T , 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 i t is pro se plaintiff's intent to bring into focus grounds upon which relief m a y be Granted, and Monetary Damages Awarded, in that this is an extraordinary civil action created as allowed pursuant to T i t l e 28 USC 2201. a) In R o m a n s Ch. 3, v. 19 & 20 THE L O R D G O D O F H O S T Declares v. 19 N o w we k n o w t h a t what things so ever t h e law saith, i t saith to them to them 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 s t o p p e d a n d a l l t h e w o r l d m a y become guilty before God. v. 2 0 Therefore b y t h e deeds o f t h e law there shall n o f l e s h b e j u s t i j i e d i n H i s sight: f o r by 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 liabUity is upon to those who are under the L a w and who have knowledge o f it. c) I n t e l 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 C o r p o r a t i o n operates and conduct i t ' s M A l T l l E W ROBERT YOUNG Plaintiff In p r o I e sm No. 6141666 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , 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 a f f a i r s u n d e r the 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 S t a t e s , 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 R u l e s , 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 order to b e incorporated, and to operate and conduct a n y B u s i n e s s T r a n s a c t i o n o r A f f a i r s m u s t f i r s t b e L i c e n s e d , a n d I n s u r e d t o d o so, w i t h K n o w l e d g e and u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e L a w s g o v e r n i n g C o r p o r a t i o n s a n d t h e i r Liabilities. e) Pro s e p l a i n t i f f has i n fact communicated and established h i m s e l f to I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n as t h e r i g h t f u l o w n e r a n d t h e o r i g i n a l c r e a t o r , 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 Technology) t h a t I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n h a s 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 f i n a n c i a l p r o f i t o n t h e c o m m e r c e and 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 market, w i t h full 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 g o o d s , 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 p e n n i s s i o n , authorization o r consent to do so, and without e v e r once p a y i n g p r o se p l a i n t i f f a n y monies, a n d o r sharing a n y o f t h e p r o f i t s w i t h p r o se plaintiff, o r offering p r o se p l a i n t i f f a n y form o fj u s t Compensation Stocks, Bonds, S h a r e s , etc. S T A T E M E N T S O F C L A I M S CAUSE O F A C T I O N CLAIM I 10) I n M a r c h o r A p r i l o f 2003, pro s e plaintiff, s e n t a c o p y o f the Designs and S c h e m a t i c s , o f h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o p e r t y , a p a t e n t a b l e i n v e n t i o n , a n d c o p y r i g h t a b l e w o r k , t o wit; a H a c k e r p r o o f , Virus p r o D / 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 s e p l a i n t i f f calls [LANCELOT), for i t impervious ability to b e i n g Hacked into and its ability to fight o f f V i r u s e s , to Steve J o b s , a t A p p l e C o m p u t e r , i n C a l i f o r n i a , b u t d i d n o t s e n d M r . J o b s , t h e M A T I ' H E W R O B E R T YOUNG Plaintiff i n 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 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 is the T r a d e Secret. S e e Attached Exhibits M a r k e d P R O S E P L . EX. I. a ) Pro se plaintiff requested that M r . J o b s , Help and Assistance him. i n developing and M a r k e t i n g , h i 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 i n v e n t i o n , o r b u y i t f r o m 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 M i l l i o n D o l l a r s [$ 250,000,000.00], and that upon receiving a contractual signed agreement, t h e n pro se p l a i n t i f f would agree to sent to M r . J o b s , the Proprietary I n f o r m a t i o n , the Trade Secrets o n how to make this computer Technology work. b ) S t e v e J o b s , never replied to pro se plaintiff. CLAIM I I 1 1 ) 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 year, 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 intellectual p r o p e r t y patentable inventions, to I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n . T h e exact nature and extent o f the Agreement between M r . J o b s , and I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n is n o t known to pro se plaintiff at 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, and Informing I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n j u s t where exactly he got 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 I I I 12) I n J u n e o f 2 0 0 6 , 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 left h a n d , 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 r m 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 I T H E W ROBERT YOUNG P l a i n t i f f In p r o s e S I D No. 6 2 4 1 6 6 6 777 S t a n t o n B l v d O n t a r i o , O R 97914 12 Million 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 t r y figure out pro se plaintiff's proprietary i n f o r m a t i o n , Trade Secrets, See Attached Exhibit Marked P R O S E P L . EX.2&6. a) Pro se plaintiff can i n fact come Before this U S District Court, and prove conclusively t h a t t h e c o m p u t e r m o t h e r b o a r d t w h i c h M r . G e l s i n g e r , is h o l d i n g i n h i s h a n d t i n t h e N e w s P a p e r is i n fact a product created and manufactured from pro se plaintiff's i n t e l l e c t u a l property Design, patentable invention, o f [ L A N C E L O T ] the H a c k e r p r o o f , Virus P r o o f computer. See Attached E x h i b i t s M a r k e d 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 o f 2005, and in that same Public Announcement t 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 t to H E L P I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n [SOLVE 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 SE P L . EX. 3. This is i n 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 i m p l i c i t P L E A b y I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n for a n y o n e 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 Six 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 [Core-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 plaintiff made certain demands and t placing certain restrictions, and obligations o n any Letters, Response, Reply, Communiques, o r interacting Missives, to which I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n did in fact, i n large part complied with, which M A T I B E W R O B E R T YOUNG Plaintiff In p r o se S I D N o . 6242666 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914 13 i n t u m 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 A c k n o w l e d g e t h a t p r o 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 of, a n d o r i g i n a l i n v e n t o r a n d c r e a t o r o f t h e [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 t o 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 i n this m a n n e r ; Dear I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n ; D o e s t h i s l o o k f a m i l i a r ? W e l l i t s h o u l d . I t is t h e H a c k e r P r o o f , V i r u s P r o o f Computer, 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 asked him for T w o H u n d r e d a n d Fifty M i l l i o n D o l l a r s , h e t o o k i t t o y o u at I n t e l , a n d y o u b u i l t i t b u t y o u d o n o t k n o w h o w to t u r n i t o n . So here is what y o u are going to do. Y o u are going to A g r e e to p a y m e S e v e n t y P e r c e n t ( 7 0 % ) e v e r y t h i n g t h a t Y o u Gross O f f o f it, a n d t h e n I will tell y o u h o w to t u m I t o n a n d m a k e i t d o w h a t I D e s i g n e d i t t o 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 ink, o r I a m going to send copies O f m y s c h e m a t i c s 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 the 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 , and 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 p l a i n t i f f , S e e Attached Exhibit Marked P R O S E P L . E X. . c) Pro se p l a i n t i f f request that this U. S. District Court p a y special Attention to the fact t h e e v e n t h o u g h , 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 to 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 Never once Denied n o r even tried to Challenge pro s e p l a i n t i f f ' s position as t h e R i g h t f u l O w n e r , a n d Original Creator, 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 , latter c a l l V i r t u a l Technology, seen b e i n g H e l d i n t h e h a n d o f M A T I H E W R O B E R T YOUNG P l a i n t i f f in p r o se SID No. 6%41666 777 S t a n t o n B l v d Ontario, O R 97914 14 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 Gelsinger. See Attached Exhibit Marked P R O S E PL. E X . 4 & 7. d) W h e n Intel C o r p o r a t i o n replied within Two and o n e h a l f weeks, in t h e m a n n e r D E M A N D E D b y p r o s e p l a i n t i f f , p r o s e p l a i n t i f f , w r o t e to I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n a s e c o n d t i m e , a n d i n this Communique p r o s e p l a i n t i f f did n o t address Intel C o r p o r a t i o n so harshly, a n d m a d e I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n , w h a t p r o s e p l a i n t i f f b e l i e v e d to b e a l a i r p r o p o s i t i o n , w h i c h w a s s t a t e d t o t h i s effect; Dear I n t e l Corporation: T h a n k y o u for r e s p o n d i n g i n t h e M a n n e r t h a t I r e q u e s t e d , A n d since y o u d i d i t m a y n o t h a v e b e e n y o u r fault a n d t h a t y o u m a y n o t have k n o w n that Steve J o b s l i e d to you, so here is m y Offer to you, S i g n a Contractual Agreement w i t h m e where I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n w i l l agree t o p a y m e Fifteen P e r c e n t ( 1 5 % ) 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 , a n d V i r u s P r o o f C o m p u t e r [LANCELOT], a n d a l s o s i g n a C o n t r a c t u a l A g r e e m e n t to manufacture build, a n d M a r k e t f o r me, m y Computer Chip Microprocessor,[TRAD WA Y]. Please n o t e that the S A M E Conditions a p p l y here, 3 0 days, w i t h Y o u r s i g n a t u r e i n B l u e i n k o n B o n d e d paper. e) Intel C o r p o r a t i o n Responded j u s t as pro se p l a i n t i f f Requested, within T h r e e (3) weeks, o n Bonded p a p e r , w i t h the Signature in Blue ink. S e e Attached Exhibit Marked PRO S E P L . E X . 5, t ) A g a i n p r o s e p l a i n t i f f R e q u e s t t h a t t h i s U.S. D i s t r i c t C o u r t p a y s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n t o t h e 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 d i d n o t C h a l l e n g e o r D e n y t h a t p r o 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 o f this Technology. CLAIM V MATTHEW ROBERT YOUNG P l a i n t i f f ID p r o s e S I D No. 6 2 4 2 6 6 6 777 Stanton Blvd ODtarlo, O R 97914 15 a) According to various News Paper Publications, Intel C o r p o r a t i o n has Made over F i f t y Billion Dollars [$ 50,000,000,000.00] profit o f f o f pro se plaintiff's intellectual property patentable invention, which Intel C o r p o r a t i o n calls [Core 2, Duo Processor] alone, and pro se p l a i n t i f f c a n n o t e v e n guess h o w m u c h I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n h a s m a d e o f f o f p r o s e p l a i n t i f f ' s intellectual property patentable invention, which I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n calls [Virtual Technology) b) B u t H E R E I S A FACTUAL CONTENTION, AND ISSUE AT LAW, AT COMMON LAW, Intel C o r p o r a t i o n would NOT HAVE this Money, Profits, Stocks, Bonds, and position as the Main supplier. and p r i n c i p a l p r o v i d e r o f the Worlds Computer Microchips, HAD Steve Jobs NOT provided I n t e l Corporation, a copy o f p r o se plaintiff's Intellectual Property Designs, and Schematics from which I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n then manufactured the Dual 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) Even after pro se p l a i n t i f f has CONCLUSIVELY PROVEN to I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n that he is i n fact the Rightful Owner. and the Original Inventor o f this Technology, Intel C o r p o r a t i o n continues to violate pro se p l a i n t i f f s Constitutional, and Common Law 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 t r a d e 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 a w a r e t h a t p r o 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 , a n d o r i g i n a l i n v e n t o r o f this t e c h n o l o g y , k n o w i n g l y c o n c e a l , w i t h h o l d , t r a n s f e r i n i n t e r s t a t e c o m m e r c e , sell 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, a n d 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 se p l a i n t i f f ' s a p p r o v a l , a u t h o r i z a t i o n , c o n s e n t . a n d a g a i n s t pro 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 or s h o w i n g any consideration to the fact that had i t n o t b e e n for pro se 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 i n v e n t i o n designs a n d schematics, I n t e l C o r p o r a t i o n would M A 1 T I I E W R O B E R T YOUNG P l a i n t i f f 10 p r o I e SID No. 6242666 777 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914 16 N O T b e t h e W o r l d l e a d e r i n c o m p u t e r m i c r o c h i p s Today, A M D ( A d v a n c e d M i c r o D e v i c e s ) , o r M i c r o n T e c h n o l o g y could have j u s t as easily have been the World L e a d e r i n manufacturing c o m p u t e r m i c r o c h i p p r o c e s s o r s w i t h p r o se 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. See Attached Exhibit Marked P R O S E P L . EX. 7 & 10. R E L I E F SOUGHT T H E R F O R E P u r s u a n t t o t h e U n i t e d States C o d e A m e n d m e n t s c i t e d a b o v e i n t h i s c i v i l action, with emphasis at T i t l e 28 USC 1343 (a) (1) (2) (3), and (4), 1338, and 2201; This 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 h a s t h e A u t h o r i t y a n d n e e d e d J u r i s d i c t i o n t o R e n d e r J u d g m e n t s , and Issue Orders directed at and to the parties here i n this civil action, and to O R D E R that a n E x t r a o r d i n a r y H e a r i n g b e Held, a n d C o n d u c t e d w h e r e i n t h e p a r t i e s m u s t p e r f o n n u n d e r seal r e c o r d o f t h i s U S D i s t r i c t C o u r t a D e m o n s t r a t i o n o f t h e Actual T r a d e S e c r e t s t h e P r o p r i e t a r y I n f o n n a t i o n pertaining to the Commercially Valuable Products called D u a l C o r e , C o r e 2 D u o M i c r o Processor, a n d t h e C o m p u t e r T e c h n o l o g y c a l l e d V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y . M A T T H E W R O B E R T Y O U N G , T h e C l a m a n t P l a i n t i f f p r o c e e d i n g i n p r o se, D E M A N D S J u s t C o m p e n s a t i o n A w a r d s i n t h e S u m a n d A m o u n t o f F i v e Billion D o l l a r s , [$ 5,000,000,000.00] for the unauthorized use and profits made from pro se p l a i n t i f f s i n t e l l e c t u a l personal p r o p e r t y p a t e n t a b l e invention, and copyrightable w o r k s . P r o se p l a i n t i f f f u r t h e r D E M A N D S C o m p e n s a t o r y A w a r d s o f A L L o f t h e P a t e n t s , Copyrights, Trademarks, P r o c e e d s Monies, S t o c k s , B o n d s , Securities, a n d Contracts, A g r e e m e n t s , and a n y a n d A L L B u s i n e s s D E A L S m a d e g e n e r a t e d a n d o r a g r e e d t o i n r e g a r d s t o t h e 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 c a l l e d Core 2 D u o , a n d V i r t u a l T e c h n o l o g y . P r o se p l a i n t i f f R e q u e s t t h a t t h i s U n i t e d S t a t e s C o u r t I s s u e a n d I n j u n c t i o n p r o h i b i t i n g M A T I H E W R O B E R T YOUNG Plaintiff in p r o se S I D No. 6 2 4 2 6 6 6 7 7 7 S t a n t o n Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914 17 Intel Corporation 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~ day o f t)tJILe - I declare u n d e r the penalty o f p e r j u r y t h a t the foregoing is t r u e a n d correct to the best o f my knowledge. Signed and Dated this Vl Day of_V:...~:...(r1....:;..;;;;e_ _. '2 CO <t ~~\}QitRT~ MATTHEW ROBERT YOUNG Plaintiff in pro Ie S I D No. 6242666 777 Stanton Blvd O n t a r i o , O R 97914 RECVD'09 JUN 2213:35U3DC-oRP CERTITICATEOFSERVICE fvtcJJn e W (J.. ~ CASE NUMBER: ( i f known) C - 0 j - I L[ qt ,- f3 R V COMES NOW, ~he 4 1 12, YUvvt~ ,and certifies the following: CASE NAME: fv\cJJkt..J P.. ' i O J 1 lrt . iV . That I am\incarcerated b~ the 1\ ~- \ C If 7 re~~m Department o f Corrections at 7 7 7 SrfM-\ -f P;1, '1 I (jive!. . That on the day o f br v I t e , 200 tV , I personally placed in the Correctional Institution's mailing service A TRUE COPY o f the following: JL A"(vIe.ivJ~J e. OOV'l..L.!Jp-.-~~~\t ..I<..-"d-'----I placed the above in a securely enclosed, postage prepaid envelope, to the person(s) named at the places addressed below: _ Page 1 o f 1 -Certificate o f Service Form 03.015

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?