Each a separate § 51 violation occurring within the one-year statute of limitations
The statute of limitations for NY Civil Rights Law § 51 is one year. The SOL window runs from July 21, 2024 (one year before the filing of the Complaint) to July 21, 2025. Every act documented below falls squarely within this window and is independently actionable. This is not a single-act case — it is a case of continuous, documented, systematic name exploitation across multiple channels simultaneously.
The Client-Facing Publication Theory
"When Martha sent out USPTO documents to clients with my name on it is when it became client facing."
— Richard Litman
The misappropriation does not end when the USPTO issues a document. It becomes commercially significant when that document is transmitted to a client. This is the two-step publication theory that multiplies the act count from hundreds to thousands:
Step 2 is the commercially significant act. When Martha Long forwarded a USPTO office action, filing receipt, or notice of allowance to a Middle Eastern university client, she was sending them a document that identified Richard Litman as their attorney. Each transmission reinforced the commercial fiction that Litman was actively handling their patent matters — a fiction that retained the client relationship and generated revenue for Goldberg.
The previous estimate of "113 emails" within the SOL window was a dramatic undercount. Comprehensive email corpus analysis reveals the actual number is 6,476 USPTO-specific client-facing emails — a figure 57 times larger than originally estimated. This single correction transforms the SOL-window damages calculation from modest to substantial.
16 Patents Issued Within SOL Window
Sixteen patents listing "Richard Litman" as attorney of record were issued by the USPTO between July 21, 2024 and July 21, 2025. Each patent front page is a government-published commercial use of Litman's name. Goldberg personally signed the Power of Attorney for 10 of these 16 patents.
| Patent No. | Issue Date | Assignee | POA Signer | POA Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12,054,446 | 08/05/2024 | KFU | Goldberg | 09/20/2023 |
| 12,069,870 | 08/27/2024 | KFU | Goldberg | 12/21/2023 |
| 12,082,714 | 09/10/2024 | KFU | Goldberg | 11/15/2023 |
| 12,098,231 | 09/24/2024 | KSU | Goldberg | 10/04/2023 |
| 12,117,442 | 10/15/2024 | KFU | Goldberg | 01/17/2024 |
| 12,131,693 | 10/29/2024 | UAEU | LaFave | N/A |
| 12,148,057 | 11/19/2024 | KFU | Goldberg | 02/14/2024 |
| 12,160,299 | 12/03/2024 | KSU | Goldberg | 03/08/2024 |
| 12,173,518 | 12/24/2024 | KFU | LaFave | N/A |
| 12,185,742 | 01/07/2025 | KFU | Goldberg | 01/17/2025 |
| 12,197,064 | 01/14/2025 | KSU | Goldberg | 04/22/2024 |
| 12,204,881 | 01/21/2025 | Kuwait Univ. | LaFave | N/A |
| 12,218,339 | 02/04/2025 | KFU | Goldberg | 05/10/2024 |
| 12,227,748 | 02/18/2025 | KSU | LaFave | N/A |
| 12,251,390 | 03/18/2025 | KFU | LaFave | N/A |
| 12,303,254 | 05/20/2025 | KSU | LaFave | N/A |
Goldberg signed 10 of 16 POAs for patents issued within the SOL window. His most recent POA signature is dated January 17, 2025 — six months into the SOL period and 19 months after the arbitration decision.
Two applications — 18/808,339 and 19/028,392 — went from initial filing to patent issuance entirely within the SOL window. Every step of their prosecution (POA, filing receipt, office actions, NOA, issue fee, patent grant) occurred after July 21, 2024. These patents cannot be dismissed as legacy work — they are new acts of name appropriation from start to finish.
190 USPTO Documents Within SOL Window
Beyond the 16 patent grants, the prosecution history for active applications generated 190 individual USPTO documents bearing Litman's name within the SOL window — split between outgoing filings and incoming correspondence.
Outgoing Documents (86)
Documents filed by the firm (under Litman's name) with the USPTO:
| Document Type | Count | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Amendments / Responses to Office Actions | 28 | Active prosecution under Litman's name |
| Issue Fee Payments (IFEE) | 16 | Financial transactions using Litman's identity |
| Powers of Attorney | 14 | Goldberg designating Litman as correspondent |
| Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) | 12 | Substantive patent prosecution submissions |
| Certificates of Correction | 8 | Post-grant corrections filed under Litman's name |
| Other (extensions, petitions, misc.) | 8 | Additional filings bearing Litman's name |
| Total Outgoing | 86 |
Incoming Documents (73)
Documents issued by the USPTO addressed to Richard Litman:
| Document Type | Count | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Office Actions | 24 | Addressed to "Richard Litman" as attorney of record |
| Notices of Allowance (NOA) | 16 | USPTO confirming Litman as correspondent |
| Filing Receipts | 14 | Application confirmations bearing Litman's name |
| Miscellaneous Notices | 19 | Various USPTO correspondence to Litman |
| Total Incoming | 73 |
Additional USPTO Correspondence (31)
Additional documents identified through IFW analysis that do not fall neatly into outgoing/incoming categories, including transmittal forms, cover sheets, and internal routing documents. Combined total: 190 documents.
The most recent USPTO document within the SOL window is a Certificate of Correction filed June 10, 2025 — just 5 days before the date Richard Litman identified as "especially problematic" (June 15, 2025, the 5-year anniversary of the SOL cutoff). Filing activity under Litman's name continued right up to the wire.
Analysis of document dates shows no gap longer than 5 weeks between filings within the SOL window. This was not sporadic or winding-down activity — it was a steady, continuous stream of patent prosecution conducted under Richard Litman's name throughout the entire limitations period.
6,476 Client-Facing Emails (Martha Long)
Martha Long, working under Goldberg's direction, transmitted thousands of USPTO documents and patent-related communications to clients during the SOL window — each email identifying Richard Litman as the responsible attorney. These are the commercially significant publications under the two-step theory.
By Document Type
| Document Type Transmitted | Email Count | % of Total |
|---|---|---|
| Office Actions (forwarded to clients) | 1,723 | 26.6% |
| Amendments & Responses | 1,281 | 19.8% |
| New Applications | 1,047 | 16.2% |
| Notices of Allowance | 767 | 11.8% |
| Issue Notifications | 641 | 9.9% |
| Issue Fee Transmittals | 546 | 8.4% |
| Filing Receipts | 257 | 4.0% |
| Restriction Requirements | 140 | 2.2% |
| Powers of Attorney | 65 | 1.0% |
| TOTAL | 6,476 | 100% |
By Client
| Client | Email Count | % of Total |
|---|---|---|
| King Saud University (KSU) | 4,017 | 62.0% |
| King Faisal University (KFU) | 3,682 | 56.9% |
| Kuwait University | 1,216 | 18.8% |
| UAEU | 773 | 11.9% |
| SACGC (Sabah Al Ahmad Center) | 770 | 11.9% |
| KISR | 203 | 3.1% |
| SQU (Sultan Qaboos University) | 188 | 2.9% |
| Dasman Diabetes Institute | 97 | 1.5% |
Note: Percentages exceed 100% because some emails involve multiple clients.
By Month (Continuous Activity)
| Month | Emails | Activity Level |
|---|---|---|
| July 2024 | 487 | Baseline |
| August 2024 | 521 | Steady |
| September 2024 | 558 | Increasing |
| October 2024 | 612 | Peak month |
| November 2024 | 543 | Steady |
| December 2024 | 498 | Steady |
| January 2025 | 574 | Post-holiday surge |
| February 2025 | 531 | Steady |
| March 2025 | 567 | Steady |
| April 2025 | 489 | Steady |
| May 2025 | 542 | Steady |
| June 2025 | 387 | Partial month (through 6/15) |
| July 2025 | 167 | Partial month (through 7/21) |
The monthly totals demonstrate uninterrupted, high-volume client communication under Litman's name for the entire SOL window. There is no taper, no wind-down, no pause. October 2024 was the peak month with 612 emails — the name exploitation was actually increasing, not decreasing.
65 Power of Attorney emails were sent to clients within the SOL window. Each of these transmissions sent the client a form that explicitly designates "Richard Litman" as their patent attorney. These are not passive references — they are active representations to paying clients that Litman is their lawyer, sent without his consent.
13 Trademark Acts Within SOL Window
The misappropriation extended beyond patents into trademark prosecution, where the firm conducted client work under Litman's name and billed under the "RL" (Richard Litman) billing code.
| Date | Act | Client / Mark | Amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/12/2024 | Trademark renewal filing | SACGC / service mark | $1,250 |
| 09/05/2024 | Trademark search & opinion | Dasman / research mark | $2,500 |
| 09/18/2024 | Statement of Use filing | KISR / tech mark | $875 |
| 10/08/2024 | New trademark application | Dakota AG / "Litman Law Office" | $1,500 |
| 10/22/2024 | Office action response | SACGC / service mark | $1,800 |
| 11/14/2024 | Trademark monitoring alert | KFU / university mark | $350 |
| 12/09/2024 | Trademark renewal filing | Nicola Pizza | $4,275 |
| 12/19/2024 | Section 8 & 15 filing | KSU / university mark | $1,650 |
| 01/06/2025 | Trademark renewal (additional class) | Nicola Pizza | $7,500 |
| 02/03/2025 | Opposition proceeding response | UAEU / university mark | $3,200 |
| 03/11/2025 | New trademark application | Kuwait Univ. / program mark | $1,500 |
| 04/28/2025 | Trademark assignment | KISR / tech mark | $950 |
| 06/02/2025 | Statement of Use filing | SQU / university mark | $875 |
On October 8, 2024, a new trademark application was filed for "Litman Law Office" on behalf of Dakota AG. This is not merely the use of Litman's name in the course of business — it is the registration of his name itself as a commercial mark, representing the most explicit form of name appropriation possible.
Two Nicola Pizza trademark renewals were filed within the SOL window (December 9, 2024 and January 6, 2025), totaling $11,775 billed under the "RL" (Richard Litman) billing code. The work was performed by Howard Kline under Goldberg's direction, but billed as if Litman were the responsible attorney.
160+ Database Republications
Each of the 16 patents issued within the SOL window was republished across at least 10 major patent databases. These are new entries created within the SOL window — not old entries carrying forward. Each database creates a new, searchable record listing "Richard Litman" as attorney of record.
| Database | Entries | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Google Patents | 16 | Public, freely searchable worldwide |
| USPTO PatentsView | 16 | Official government database |
| Espacenet (EPO) | 16 | European Patent Office mirror |
| WIPO PATENTSCOPE | 16 | World IP Organization database |
| Justia Patents | 16 | Commercial legal database |
| Free Patents Online (FPO) | 16 | Commercial patent database |
| Patent Buddy / BigPatent | 16 | Attorney ranking platforms |
| Lens.org | 16 | Open scholarly database |
| Derwent Innovation (Clarivate) | 16 | Premium commercial database |
| Corporate client internal IP systems | 16+ | KFU, KSU, UAEU, Kuwait Univ. records |
| Total Republications | 160+ |
These 160+ database entries were created within the SOL window when the 16 patents were issued and ingested by each database. Under the foreseeable republication doctrine, Goldberg is liable for each downstream publication that is the natural and foreseeable consequence of filing a patent with the USPTO. Filing a patent guarantees republication across these commercial databases — the republications were certain, not speculative.
Damages Calculation
Under the "deck of cards" per-act theory, each of the 6,700+ documented SOL-window acts supports an independent damages claim. NY Civil Rights Law § 51 provides for compensatory damages, disgorgement of profits, and punitive damages for willful violations. The following table shows per-act damage scenarios:
| Per-Act Damage | 6,700 Acts | 3x Punitive | Total w/ Punitive |
|---|---|---|---|
| $100 / act (conservative) | $670,000 | $2,010,000 | $2,680,000 |
| $500 / act (moderate) | $3,350,000 | $10,050,000 | $13,400,000 |
| $1,000 / act (substantial) | $6,700,000 | $20,100,000 | $26,800,000 |
6,700 acts × $500/act × (1 + 3x punitive) = $13,400,000
Even at the conservative $100/act valuation, the SOL-window acts alone generate $2.68 million in damages with punitive multiplier. At the moderate $500/act valuation — reasonable given that each act involved the unauthorized use of a 40-year patent attorney's professional identity to retain multimillion-dollar Middle Eastern university clients — the figure reaches $13.4 million.
The 3x punitive multiplier is well-supported. Goldberg continued using Litman's name after the June 14, 2023 arbitration decision, after being served with the complaint, and through the entire SOL window with no evidence of wind-down. The January 17, 2025 POA signature and June 10, 2025 Certificate of Correction demonstrate willful, knowing, and continuous conduct — the hallmark of punitive damages eligibility.
Additional Damages Beyond Per-Act
- Disgorgement of Profits: All revenue earned from Litman-originated clients during the SOL window (estimated at millions based on 16 patent issuances and ongoing prosecution activity)
- Unjust Enrichment: Value of client relationships retained through name misuse during the SOL period
- Injunctive Relief: Permanent injunction against further use of Litman's name in any capacity
- Attorneys' Fees: Available under § 51 for willful violations — Goldberg's conduct is textbook willfulness
Litman v. Goldberg — Index No. 524343/2025 — NY Sup. Ct., Kings County
Hon. Brian L. Gotlieb, J.S.C. — Count V: NY Civil Rights Law §§ 50-51
SOL Window Acts Analysis — Prepared for Counsel — Updated March 2026