Case: Litman v. Goldberg, Index No. 524343/2025 (NY Sup. Ct., Kings County) Prepared: 2026-03-17 Purpose: Answer the lawyers' question: How did Goldberg do it? — Document the specific mechanism by which Goldberg's affirmative acts caused Litman's name to appear on official USPTO records, public patent documents, and external correspondence.
Every time a patent application is filed with the USPTO, the applicant must identify an attorney/agent of record and a customer number for official correspondence. The customer number controls who receives all USPTO mail (office actions, notices of allowance, issue notifications, etc.).
Customer Number 37833 is the correspondence address of Nath, Goldberg & Meyer (NGM).
The mechanism Goldberg used: 1. File or take over a pending application listing Richard C. Litman as attorney of record and CN-37833 as the correspondence address. 2. Sign a Power of Attorney (PTO/AIA/82A) designating CN-37833 — keeping Litman's name as the named attorney while ensuring all USPTO mail goes to NGM. 3. Sign any assignment cover sheets in the same capacity. 4. Let the prosecution run — USPTO issues Filing Receipts, Office Actions, Notices of Allowance, and ultimately the patent itself — all bearing Litman's name as attorney of record. 5. Pay the issue fee via PTO-85B (IFEE) — an additional affirmative act confirming NGM's ongoing control.
At every step, Litman's name was placed into a government record by Goldberg's act or by the natural operation of the USPTO system following Goldberg's act. Litman did not consent to, participate in, or benefit from any of this.
The following traces the documentary chain for App 18/392,663 → Patent 11,980,937, the strongest single application in the record (Goldberg signed both a POA and an assignment cover sheet on the same day — Dec. 21, 2023).
Document: PTO/AIA/82A — Power of Attorney Transmittal
Signatory: /Joshua B. Goldberg/, Reg. No. 44126
Customer Number designated: 37833 (Nath, Goldberg & Meyer)
Attorney named: Richard C. Litman
File: evidence/poa_pdfs/POA_11980937_18392663_2023-12-21.pdf
Legal significance: This is Goldberg's personal, signed federal form designating
CN-37833 as the official correspondence address while naming Litman as attorney. From
this moment, all USPTO mail for this application went to NGM, and all USPTO records
identified Litman as the attorney of record.
Also on Dec. 21, 2023: Document: Patent Assignment Cover Sheet (USPTO) Signatory: /Joshua B. Goldberg/ — correspondence email: jgoldberg@nathlaw.com Correspondent block shows: RICHARD C. LITMAN / NATH, GOLDBERG & MEYER Reel/Frame: 065933 / 0139 Legal significance: On the same day as the POA, Goldberg signed the assignment cover sheet that also listed Litman as the correspondent attorney. Two separate federal documents, same day, same application — both showing Litman's name used under Goldberg's signature.
Document Code: APP.FILE.REC — Filing Receipt
Direction: OUTGOING (from USPTO to CN-37833/NGM)
File: evidence/mechanism_docs/APP_FILE_REC_11980937_2024-02-08_[id].pdf
What it shows: The USPTO's official acknowledgment of the application, addressed to
CN-37833 (NGM), listing Richard C. Litman as attorney of record and the official
correspondent address as Nath, Goldberg & Meyer.
Legal significance: This is the first official government document confirming that
as far as the USPTO is concerned, Litman is the attorney on this case and NGM is
where all mail goes. This document was created entirely as a result of Goldberg's
Dec. 21 filing act.
Document Code: TRACK1.GRANT — Track One Prioritized Examination Granted
Direction: OUTGOING (USPTO to CN-37833/NGM)
File: evidence/mechanism_docs/TRACK1_GRANT_11980937_2024-02-22_[id].pdf
What it shows: USPTO confirms accelerated examination, addressed to CN-37833/NGM,
Litman as attorney of record.
Legal significance: Another official document bearing Litman's name sent to NGM —
the pattern of ongoing use continues with each stage of prosecution.
Note on Office Actions: App 18/392,663 went directly to allowance via Track One (no rejections). For applications that received office actions — e.g., App 18/242,465 (Patent 12,043,608, 74 documents in IFW) — there will be CTNF/CTFR documents showing Litman's name and NGM's address on substantive USPTO correspondence requiring a response. These are high-value documents: office actions require the attorney of record to respond, meaning Litman's name was attached to active prosecution work being handled by NGM.
Document Code: NOA — Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)
Direction: OUTGOING (USPTO to CN-37833/NGM)
Files: evidence/mechanism_docs/NOA_11980937_2024-04-03_[id].pdf
evidence/mechanism_docs/NOA_11980937_2024-04-15_[id].pdf
What it shows: The PTOL-85 is the official government form that later becomes
Line 74 of the issued patent. It lists:
- Attorney/Agent and Firm Name: Richard C. Litman / Nath, Goldberg & Meyer
- Correspondence address: CN-37833
Legal significance: This is the direct bridge between prosecution correspondence
and the public patent face. The attorney name on the PTOL-85 is the attorney name that
appears on the issued patent. Goldberg's POA on Dec. 21 caused Litman's name to appear
here five months later.
Document Code: IFEE — Issue Fee Payment (PTO-85B)
Direction: INCOMING (submitted by NGM/Goldberg to USPTO)
File: evidence/ifw_ifee/[patent]_IFEE.pdf
What it shows: NGM (acting under Goldberg's direction) submitted the PTO-85B to
pay the issue fee. This is an affirmative submission to the USPTO that triggers the
patent grant. It is signed/submitted under the authority designated by the POA
(i.e., Goldberg's act in Stage 1 is the authority for this submission).
Legal significance: Goldberg's organization made an affirmative filing — under
Litman's name as attorney of record — to issue this patent. They chose to proceed.
Document: US 11,980,937 B1
Line 74: "Nath, Goldberg & Meyer; Richard C. Litman"
File: evidence/mechanism_docs/EGRANT_PDF_11980937_2024-05-14_[id].pdf
What it shows: The final public record. Litman's name appears on the face of the
issued United States patent as the attorney responsible for prosecution.
Legal significance: This is the public harm — Litman's professional identity and
USPTO registration are permanently attached to a patent he did not prosecute, in a
public government database, as a direct result of Goldberg's chain of acts.
When an office action (CTNF/CTFR) is issued, the USPTO sends it to the attorney of record (Litman) at the correspondent address (CN-37833/NGM). The attorney of record is then legally responsible for responding within a statutory deadline.
In applications with office actions (see e.g. App 18/242,465, Patent 12,043,608 with 74 IFW documents), Litman's name was attached to: - Rejections from the USPTO examiner - Deadlines for response - The substantive back-and-forth of patent prosecution
This means Goldberg was not merely allowing Litman's name to appear passively — he was actively prosecuting patent applications under Litman's name as attorney of record, conducting examination correspondence that Litman had no knowledge of and did not authorize.
In addition to the prosecution channel (POA → filing receipt → office actions → NOA → patent), Goldberg used a second channel: patent assignments.
When an inventor assigns a patent to a company (e.g., KFU), the assignment cover sheet requires an attorney/correspondent. Goldberg signed assignment cover sheets listing: - Correspondent: RICHARD C. LITMAN / NATH, GOLDBERG & MEYER - Signatory: /Joshua B. Goldberg/, jgoldberg@nathlaw.com
These assignments are recorded in the USPTO Assignment Center and become permanent public records linking Litman's name to the transaction.
| Application | Assignment Date | Signatory | Litman Correspondent | Reel/Frame |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18/392,663 | 2023-12-21 | J. Goldberg | RICHARD C. LITMAN / NGM | 065933/0139 |
| 18/383,448 | 2023-10-29 | J. Goldberg | RICHARD C. LITMAN / NGM | 065379/0084 |
| 18/118,551 | 2023-03-07 | N. Usman (NGM staff) | RICHARD C. LITMAN / NGM | (see UAEU tracker) |
| Act | What Goldberg Did | What USPTO Did | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Filed/Took Over Application | Signed POA (82A) naming Litman as attorney, designating CN-37833 | Recorded Litman as attorney of record; all mail → NGM | Litman's name entered USPTO system; NGM controls |
| 2. Prosecuted Under Litman's Name | NGM received and responded to office actions under Litman's name | Issued office actions, Track One grants, NOAs addressed to NGM/Litman | Each government document bore Litman's name; prosecution happened without Litman |
| 3. Issued the Patent | NGM submitted IFEE (issue fee) to confirm issuance | Issued patent with Litman on Line 74 | Permanent public record: Litman's name on US patent he did not prosecute |
The following documents are available via the USPTO API from the IFW JSON files already
in the project. Run python scripts/download_mechanism_docs.py (requires USPTO_API_KEY)
to download all of them automatically.
| Code | Description | Evidence Value |
|---|---|---|
APP.FILE.REC |
Filing Receipt | Shows Litman as attorney + NGM address at filing |
CTNF |
Non-Final Office Action | Shows Litman's name on active prosecution rejections |
CTFR |
Final Office Action | Same — even stronger (deadline pressure) |
NOA |
Notice of Allowance (PTOL-85) | Direct bridge to patent Line 74 |
ISSUE.NTF |
Issue Notification | Shows Litman name → final confirmation |
TRACK1.GRANT |
Track One Grant | Shows Litman on expedited track decisions |
BIB |
Bibliographic Data Sheet | Internal USPTO record confirming attorney/assignee |
After downloading, review each Filing Receipt and any office actions for the phrase "Richard C. Litman" in the attorney/correspondent block. These should be highlighted and tabbed in the exhibit binder alongside the corresponding POA.
Documents referenced above are either already downloaded (see evidence/poa_pdfs/)
or available for download via python scripts/download_mechanism_docs.py.