71 emails from uncle's personal Gmail accounts revealing 8 bombshell findings
Litman v. Goldberg, Index No. 524343/2025 — NY Sup. Ct., Kings County — Hon. Brian L. Gotlieb, J.S.C.
Lev Dvorkin (Sept 18, 2025) — Israeli client wrote to Goldberg:
"I turned to your firm, Nath, Goldberg & Meyer, for the preparation and registration of my new patent solely for the reason that Mr. Richard Litman works with you. I first met him back in 1996, when I approached his firm, Litman Law Office."
Goldberg responded "Yup. On it." — took the work while litigation was pending.
Thomas Bennington (July 3, 2025) — NGM website contact form:
"a customer of Richard Litman's from way back... I thought the world of Mr. Litman."
(Source: iCloud Photos)
Omar Albannai (Aug 17, 2025) — Kuwaiti client WhatsApp:
"Why not you?" "I'm thinking of 'ditching' you" "East or west Richard is the best so you are unplaceable to me."
Voice message questioning why Litman recommended Goldberg. Uncle forwarded screenshots directly to Goldberg's lawyers (Leo Hurley, Aaron Gould at Connell Foley) with note: "I know Josh is counting on relationships in Kuwait."
Direct proof of Section 51 "commercial value" and actual confusion/harm from name use. Three independent clients, spanning three continents, each drawn to NGM specifically because of Litman's name.
Litman to Goldberg:
"We should discuss doing what is needed to reflect my being no longer with the firm such as taking me off the website, etc. We will need to make sure there is no confusion that I am still working with the firm."
The nathlaw.com website still showed him as "PATENT ATTORNEY" on June 21, 2025 (Wayback CDX verified). Goldberg ignored this demand for at least 11 days.
Establishes notice plus deliberate refusal to remove name. Destroys any "inadvertent" defense. Written demand followed by confirmed continued display creates willfulness as a matter of law.
OpenGov Procurement account activated Sept 2, 2025 for "Joshua Goldberg" at litman@4patent.com.
Goldberg was using Litman's personal professional email for his own procurement activities.
Literal name misappropriation — using another person's email identity for commercial purposes. Goldberg registered a government procurement account under Litman's email address, appropriating his digital identity for trade.
Litman to Goldberg:
"That is the answer that gets you into litigation. Once that occurs, there's no going back. I hope it doesn't put an end to the firm or your career."
"Now that you are terminating my employment and affiliation as of June 30, I calculate seven figures owed."
Also references "misrepresentations that you made to the arbitrator."
Real-time documentation of the break. Establishes June 30, 2025 as formal termination plus seven-figure damages claim. The reference to arbitrator misrepresentations supports judicial estoppel.
June 26: Heba Carter (GCPC, representing NGM) writes:
"This is formal notice that the Agreement has not been renewed or reinstated."
July 4: Uncle writes to Heba:
"I am interpreting your lack of responsiveness as your personal confirmation about your knowledge of NGM's use of my name and the Senior Counsel designation continuously from April 2017 through June 2025."
Also flags "unusual handling" in trust accounts for KSU, KFU, Kuwait University.
Heba responds:
"You certainly should not interpret it that way. You should not assume anything."
A non-denial.
NGM's own counsel was on notice of the name-use claim AND the financial irregularities. Her response — a non-denial — is admissible as a party-opponent statement.
Uncle formally demanded either access to or a report of all uses of his name through USPTO Customer Number 37833.
Goldberg's lawyers refused.
Documented discovery obstruction. Supports motion to compel. CN-37833 is the key through which all USPTO filings bearing Litman's name were submitted.
Uncle sent Zoom credentials for Goldberg's deposition to Connell Foley three separate times.
Warned:
"I will open the record at 10:00 AM... and note your default on the record at 10:30 AM if Defendant fails to appear."
Goldberg did not appear.
Supports sanctions motion and adverse inference. Three documented notices eliminate any claim of inadequate notice.
Q4 2025 financial reconciliation from Goldberg's own lawyer (Aaron Gould, Connell Foley).
Total collected fees on Litman-originated clients 2020–2025: ~$20M+
Revenue still flowing through Dec 2025: $276K collected fees in December alone.
Q4 2025 owed to Litman: $246,628.10
Goldberg's own counsel produced these numbers. Name use generating revenue through end of 2025. Establishes the ongoing commercial exploitation of Litman's name and the magnitude of the trade benefit.
Goldberg writing to KFU about their #1 ranking (631 patents). All filed under Litman's name. Leverages Litman's decades of work product to maintain client relationship.
Uncle requesting client list showing all Litman-originated clients tracked under internal number 418. Proves systematic attribution of client revenue to Litman.
Uncle personally helped collect $2M from King Saud University. Revenue he generated, billed under his name. Active contribution while name was being used without authorization.
Litman's attorney noting $1.25M owed by firm. Early documentation of the financial dispute that would escalate into litigation.
Uncle still routing trademark business to firm after litigation started. Shows good faith and ongoing professional involvement despite the dispute.
Same day as arbitration decision. Shows accounting dispute was ongoing at the exact moment the arbitration concluded. Dual-track evidence.
$13,624 in KSU trust. Attached: 2.4MB Middle East Statements. Trust account activity on Litman-originated work continuing through 2025.
$43K and $77K international wires from UAEU for Litman-originated work. Total $120K in a single month from one client.
Goldberg sympathetic about Cheryl in ICU while controlling health benefits through COBRA. Demonstrates leverage over Litman through family health crisis.
Still sent to rlitman@nathlaw.com AFTER accounts were supposedly eliminated July 18. Proves email addresses remained active for USPTO purposes.
Litman proposing client development strategy for GCC universities. Shows active involvement in firm business and Middle Eastern client relationships.