Date: April 13, 2026 Framework: Richard C. Litman's 5-tier classification of commercial name use Data sources: 276,899 emails (ND0001 + ND0002), 904-docket revenue linkage (NGM_Litman_Workup), Patent Revenue Linkage V2 Scope: Post-SOL (June 15, 2020 forward)
Uncle's framework identifies five independent tiers of § 51 commercial name use, each separately actionable, and each connected to accounting identifiers (docket numbers) that prove money was made using Litman's name but didn't reach him.
| Tier | Description | § 51 Uses | Unique Dockets | Revenue Linked | Litman's 20% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | USPTO IFW docs → client notification | 12,036 | 2,561 | $11,841,781 | $2,368,356 |
| 2 | Goldberg signs/sends docs with Litman's name | 977 | 393 | $782,718 | $156,544 |
| 3 | Trademarks (TM dockets, TTAB, declarations) | 2,923 | 243 | $4,230 | $846 |
| 4 | Unissued patents/TMs in USPTO files | 5,863 | 301 | $338,724 | $67,745 |
| 5 | Litman CC'd on firm/client email | 124,082 | 695 | $175,063 | $35,013 |
| GRAND TOTAL | 162,675 | 3,266 | $13,142,516 | $2,628,503 |
The 124,082 Tier 5 figure excludes 16,794 newsletters/spam; the raw total is 140,876.
Key finding: 2,080 of 3,266 dockets (64%) have documented name uses but no matching revenue in NGM's own financial records — either the money was diverted through alternate client numbers (Finding #27) or the dockets were never reconciled to Litman's 20% share.
12,036 § 51 uses | 2,561 unique dockets | $11.8M linked revenue
This is the strongest tier. Martha Long sent USPTO documents (filing receipts, NOAs, office actions, POAs, assignments) to clients or to @4patent.com distribution aliases that forwarded to clients. Each email constitutes a separate "publication" of Litman's name for § 51 purposes because:
| Alias | Count | Client |
|---|---|---|
| kfu@4patent.com | 6,018 | King Faisal University |
| ksu@4patent.com | 3,168 | King Saud University |
| uaeu@4patent.com | 910 | UAE University |
| ku@4patent.com | 845 | Kuwait University |
| clientservice@4patent.com | 758 | General intake |
Every one of these aliases routes through NGM's M365 tenant on Litman's personal domain (Finding #43 — DKIM proof).
977 § 51 uses | 393 unique dockets | $782,718 linked revenue
This tier captures Goldberg's personal causal acts — emails where Goldberg himself signed or sent documents that bear Litman's name on the mailing address, or where Goldberg directed Martha to file documents under Litman's name.
All 977 emails are FROM Goldberg. They include: - POA filings referencing Litman as attorney of record - Assignment documents with Litman's name as correspondent - Docketing instructions to Martha that perpetuate Litman's name in USPTO records - Client correspondence referencing matters docketed under Litman
The 16 Goldberg-signed POAs (Reg. 44126) are the direct causal link to Tier 1. Goldberg signs the POA → Martha files it → USPTO correspondence goes out under Litman's name → Martha sends it to the client. Goldberg created the mechanism that generated all 12,036 Tier 1 uses.
2,923 § 51 uses | 243 unique dockets | $4,230 linked revenue
Trademark matters where Litman's name appears as attorney, correspondent, or in declarations. Revenue linkage is low because the NGM_Litman_Workup focuses on patent revenue — trademark billing is tracked separately and largely unmapped in our current financial data.
Only 1 of 243 TM dockets matched to patent revenue data. The entire trademark revenue stream is effectively unmapped — this is a major discovery target. Uncle is correct that trademark matters represent a separate tier of name use with its own accounting identifiers. Demand production of all trademark billing records by docket.
| Alias | Count | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| litman@4patent.com | 612 | TM correspondence routed through Litman's own email |
| efile@4patent.com | 277 | USPTO electronic filing |
| ddi@4patent.com | 39 | Dasman Diabetes Institute |
5,863 § 51 uses | 301 unique dockets | $338,724 linked revenue
Pending applications (not yet issued or registered) where Litman's name appears in USPTO files — as attorney of record, on pending office action responses, RCEs, continuations, and prosecution correspondence. These are Litman's name in the government record before the patent issues.
Under uncle's theory, these are independently actionable because: 1. Litman's name in USPTO prosecution files is a § 51 use even before the patent publishes 2. Each office action response, RCE, or amendment filed under his name is a separate commercial use 3. The filing date (not the publication date) is when the use occurred 4. Some pending applications may never issue — but the name was still used commercially
| Alias | Count |
|---|---|
| litman@4patent.com | 3,446 |
| ksu@4patent.com | 323 |
| clientservice@4patent.com | 150 |
124,082 firm/client § 51 uses | 695 unique dockets | $175,063 linked revenue (140,876 total including 16,794 newsletters/automated)
Every email where Litman is CC'd by the firm or a client associates his professional identity with the matter. The CC line says "this person is part of this legal engagement" — that is a commercial use of his name in the context of IP legal services.
After Goldberg claimed to eliminate Litman's email accounts on July 18, 2025: - litman@4patent.com: 19,536 emails received (through Feb 2026) - r.litman@4patent.com: 455 emails received - rlitman@nathlaw.com: 1,991 emails received - TOTAL: 21,982 emails to "eliminated" accounts — 73 from firm addresses
This proves the accounts were never eliminated — Goldberg restricted Litman's access while the mailboxes continued operating (Finding #106, updated count). Every one of these 21,982 emails is a post-elimination § 51 use — Litman's professional identity continued to receive correspondence on legal matters he could not access.
| Alias | Count | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| litman@4patent.com | 121,851 | Litman's own email — largest single alias |
| r.litman@4patent.com | 4,489 | Alternate Litman address |
| ksu@4patent.com | 2,014 | King Saud University |
| efile@4patent.com | 797 | USPTO filing |
| qf@4patent.com | 679 | Qatar Foundation |
The fact that litman@4patent.com is the single most-used address in Tier 5 (121,851 of 140,876 = 87%) proves that Litman's personal email identity — on his personal domain — was the primary channel through which his name was used commercially.
Each tier represents a separate legal theory — the same docket appearing in multiple tiers means that matter generated multiple independent types of name use:
| Overlap | Shared Dockets | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 ∩ Tier 2 | 265 | Goldberg directed AND Martha forwarded USPTO docs to client |
| Tier 1 ∩ Tier 4 | 177 | Same matter had both prosecution-stage and issued-patent uses |
| Tier 3 ∩ Tier 5 | 235 | Trademark matters where Litman was also CC'd |
| Tier 1 ∩ Tier 5 | 126 | Client-facing USPTO doc AND Litman CC'd |
| Tier 4 ∩ Tier 5 | 136 | Pending application AND Litman CC'd |
Of 3,266 unique dockets with documented name uses across all 5 tiers, 2,080 (64%) have no matching revenue in NGM's own financial records. Three explanations:
Client renumbering scheme (Finding #27): Litman's clients were assigned alternate NGM numbers (starting with "1", "J", "5") to bypass his revenue allocation. The docket number on the email doesn't match the billing number in the workup.
Trademark billing gap: Nearly all 243 TM dockets are unmatched because trademark revenue is tracked in a separate system we haven't obtained.
Trust account diversion: Revenue deposited into Freedom Bank (Finding #99) or routed through alternate client numbers never appeared in the reports given to Litman.
Discovery demand: For every docket listed in the FIVE_TIER_DOCKET_REVENUE_LINKAGE.csv, demand NGM produce the corresponding billing record, trust deposit, and 20% allocation calculation.
Uncle raises the critical question: is the Amendment Section 3 email license exclusive or non-exclusive?
Amendment Paragraph 3(h) grants Litman:
"A perpetual, royalty-free license to use two specific email addresses: litman@4patent.com and rlitman@litmanlaw.com."
The license is not explicitly labeled "exclusive" or "non-exclusive." However, several factors support an implied exclusive use argument:
The email addresses contain Litman's personal name. Under NY Civil Rights Law § 51, no one may use another's name for trade without consent. The license "carves out" Litman's right to use his own name — it doesn't grant NGM the right to use his name. As uncle correctly notes: "It certainly carves out my use and implies exclusive."
DKIM infrastructure proves NGM controlled the domain. NGM's M365 tenant (nathlaw.onmicrosoft.com) handled all @4patent.com email (Finding #43). The license grants Litman the right to use the address — not NGM the right to impersonate him through it.
OpenGov procurement account: Goldberg registered for OpenGov as "Joshua Goldberg" using litman@4patent.com (Finding #34). This is literal identity misappropriation through the licensed email address.
Post-elimination interception: After July 18, 2025, NGM continued receiving 21,982 emails to Litman's addresses without his access or consent — effectively intercepting his mail.
The license is "perpetual" and "royalty-free" — language typically associated with rights being secured for the licensee, not shared with the licensor.
Even if the license is technically non-exclusive, Goldberg's conduct exceeds any implied shared-use right: - Using litman@4patent.com to register for services in Goldberg's own name = identity fraud, not shared use - Eliminating Litman's access while continuing to receive his mail = breach of perpetual license + interception - Routing 50+ client aliases through Litman's domain without his knowledge = unauthorized commercial exploitation of his name
Uncle's key insight: every email in every tier should connect to a docket number, and every docket number should connect to money.
| Total Uses | With Docket | Revenue Match | No Revenue | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tier 1 | 12,036 | ~7,500 | 1,156 | 1,405 |
| Tier 2 | 977 | ~650 | 119 | 274 |
| Tier 3 | 2,923 | ~200 | 1 | 242 |
| Tier 4 | 5,863 | ~300 | 42 | 259 |
| Tier 5 | 124,082 | ~4,294 | 61 | 634 |
For each unmatched docket, NGM must produce: 1. Client matter file (who opened it, when, RCL origination credit?) 2. Trust account deposits (all 5+ bank accounts, including Freedom Bank) 3. Billing records (fees billed, fees collected, fees allocated to Litman's 20%) 4. Payment allocation report (which monthly PAR captured this matter?) 5. Client number cross-reference (was this renumbered to bypass Litman's allocation?)
| File | Description |
|---|---|
output/TIER_1_USES.csv |
12,036 Martha→client USPTO doc emails |
output/TIER_2_USES.csv |
977 Goldberg-signed/sent documents |
output/TIER_3_USES.csv |
2,923 trademark name uses |
output/TIER_4_USES.csv |
5,863 pending application name uses |
output/TIER_5_USES.csv |
140,876 CC'd-on-email name uses |
output/FIVE_TIER_DOCKET_REVENUE_LINKAGE.csv |
3,266 dockets with tier assignments and revenue |
output/FIVE_TIER_SUMMARY.json |
Machine-readable summary |
The five-tier framework transforms the evidence from "905 patents" into 162,675 independently-dated § 51 uses across five separate legal theories, linked to 3,266 unique docket numbers representing $13.1M in documented revenue — of which Litman's 20% share ($2.6M) was systematically diverted through client renumbering, trust account concealment, and payment allocation suppression.
Each tier is independently sufficient to establish liability. Combined, they demonstrate a systematic, five-year commercial exploitation of Richard C. Litman's professional identity across every channel of NGM's legal practice — patents, trademarks, client correspondence, USPTO filings, and email infrastructure — all operated through a domain bearing his name, controlled by his M365 tenant, and directed by the man who signed 16 powers of attorney in Litman's name while simultaneously diverting the revenue those powers generated.