Oppose the Nomination of Edward M. Chen to Federal Bench
-
Author:
n/a -
Send To:
U.S. Congress and President Obama
-
Sponsored By:
American Justice Group -
More Info at:
We write to you to register our serious concerns about Edward M. Chens nomination to the U.S. federal court. Chens biased judicial style has come to our attention through legal cases publicized on the Internet. As tax payers who pay judges to do justice, We oppose his nomination and confirmation.
Chen's ruling in the Netbula v. Symantec litigation shows his judicial philosohpy. In 2006, Netbula, LLC, a small software company sued Symantec Corporation for copyright infringement. Symantec made numerous misrepresentations to the Court. Even the presiding judge had found that Symantec mischaracterize[d] the record. However, when Netbula requested a Court order to force Symantec to correct its court filings, instead of upholding the integrity of the judicial process, Chen denied Netbula's request and ordered Netbula to pay $20,000 to Symantec. The following is but one example of how Chen distorts the record.
On May 15, 2006, Netbula and Symantec held a confidential private meeting. Netbula brought a stack of paper documents, and the parties and attorneys discussed them. At the end of the meeting, Symantec declined to take the Netbula documents. Then, it alleged in a Court filing that Symantec provided the materials requested of them... Netbula, on the other hand, did not provide any of the materials requested of them.
After Symantec refused to correct their misrepresentations, Netbula's lawyer (a young black lady) filed a motion for Rule 11 sanctions. Faced with indisputable evidence, Symantec finally admitted that Netbula did bring some documents to the meeting.
Magistrate Chen heard the motion. After noting Netbula small and its attorney a solo practitioner, he distorted the record and ordered Netbula to pay $20,000.00 to Symantec. Chen wrote: [Symantecs] statement was not misleading. Netbula had not produced all the documents requested.
To justify his ruling in favor of Symantec, Chen writes:
The factual investigation [Symantec] needed to respond to [Netbulas] Rule 11 motion on the merits was not a task that could quickly be accomplished. For example, a fair amount of time was reasonably expended [by Symantec] to look into the history of events surrounding the May 15, 2006, settlement meeting the Court concludes that an award of $20,000 [to Symantec] is reasonable.
In fact, three Symantec attorneys had an email discussion on May 16, 2006 about the documents Netbula brought to the meeting the previous day. Chen awarded Symantec attorneys for making a false statement that was refuted by their own email.
The above is just one example of Chens contortionist jurisprudence. For more details, please review misconduct complaint No. 07-89078 filed with the Ninth Circuit. The Netbula v. Symantec case information can be found on the web site http://www.american-justice.org
Chens judicial philosohpy raises serious concerns on whether he can be true to the oath of a judge -- to "do equal right to the poor and to the rich."
For this reason, we request Your Honor not to appoint Chen to the lifetime tenure of Article III Judge of the United States.
Chen's ruling in the Netbula v. Symantec litigation shows his judicial philosohpy. In 2006, Netbula, LLC, a small software company sued Symantec Corporation for copyright infringement. Symantec made numerous misrepresentations to the Court. Even the presiding judge had found that Symantec mischaracterize[d] the record. However, when Netbula requested a Court order to force Symantec to correct its court filings, instead of upholding the integrity of the judicial process, Chen denied Netbula's request and ordered Netbula to pay $20,000 to Symantec. The following is but one example of how Chen distorts the record.
On May 15, 2006, Netbula and Symantec held a confidential private meeting. Netbula brought a stack of paper documents, and the parties and attorneys discussed them. At the end of the meeting, Symantec declined to take the Netbula documents. Then, it alleged in a Court filing that Symantec provided the materials requested of them... Netbula, on the other hand, did not provide any of the materials requested of them.
After Symantec refused to correct their misrepresentations, Netbula's lawyer (a young black lady) filed a motion for Rule 11 sanctions. Faced with indisputable evidence, Symantec finally admitted that Netbula did bring some documents to the meeting.
Magistrate Chen heard the motion. After noting Netbula small and its attorney a solo practitioner, he distorted the record and ordered Netbula to pay $20,000.00 to Symantec. Chen wrote: [Symantecs] statement was not misleading. Netbula had not produced all the documents requested.
To justify his ruling in favor of Symantec, Chen writes:
The factual investigation [Symantec] needed to respond to [Netbulas] Rule 11 motion on the merits was not a task that could quickly be accomplished. For example, a fair amount of time was reasonably expended [by Symantec] to look into the history of events surrounding the May 15, 2006, settlement meeting the Court concludes that an award of $20,000 [to Symantec] is reasonable.
In fact, three Symantec attorneys had an email discussion on May 16, 2006 about the documents Netbula brought to the meeting the previous day. Chen awarded Symantec attorneys for making a false statement that was refuted by their own email.
The above is just one example of Chens contortionist jurisprudence. For more details, please review misconduct complaint No. 07-89078 filed with the Ninth Circuit. The Netbula v. Symantec case information can be found on the web site http://www.american-justice.org
Chens judicial philosohpy raises serious concerns on whether he can be true to the oath of a judge -- to "do equal right to the poor and to the rich."
For this reason, we request Your Honor not to appoint Chen to the lifetime tenure of Article III Judge of the United States.
305 Signatures
-
carol Shi
- Comments
- Edward Chen does not represent the Asian American community, nor does he represent justice in the court room. He bases his rulings completely on whichever party has the most money and power, not on legal standards. We cannot blindly support Chen because he is Chinese. He does nothing for the Asian community, and if you look closely at his rulings, he purposely rules against Asians, regardless of whether they are legally correct. Obama must remove him as a magistrate, not promote him to be a District Court judge.
- Address
- Fremont, California
-
Steven Li
- Comments
- I am concerned about basic human rights violated by such corrupt judge. I oppose his nomination.
- Address
- Santa Clara, California
-
Yong Li
- Comments
- This judge mistreated his own race. From "did not provide ANY document" to "not provide All document" trick game and shame!
- Address
- В
- В
-
Bo Liu
- Comments
- Please don't appoint Edward Chen. His integrity is questioned.
- Address
- Redwood City, California
-
Feng Ying
- Comments
- I oppose his nomination.
-
Lily Fan
- Comments
- remove Chen from Federal Court !
-
Weidian Ma
- Comments
- Biased judicial style
-
linda wong
- Comments
- No Edward Chen !!!
-
Peter H. J.
- Comments
- Chen demonstrated a pattern of bias and prejudice, he should be removed from Court.
-
Mike Tran
- Comments
- I oppose the Nomination of Chen.
-
Bin Xie
- Comments
- I am an Chinese American, but I strongly oppose the Nomination of Edward M. Chen to Federal Bench
- Address
- В
- В
-
Zhiying Lao
- Comments
- I am not happy with his appointment.
-
Ben Wang
- Comments
- I oppose his appointment
-
Kao Li
- Comments
- justice for all
-
Ying Lu
- Comments
- The courtroom door is open to all
-
Peter Lin
- Comments
- No Edward Chen !!!
-
Xiangling Li
- Comments
- Chen is not good as a Judge.
-
Hong Jun
- Comments
- I oppose injustice.
-
Qin Wang
- Comments
- Chen can not represent justice
- Address
- California
-
Bin Zhang
- Comments
- Please remove Chen from the Court.
-
Fengling Zhen
- Comments
- I oppose injustice.
-
Michael Lin
- Comments
- Obama must remove Chen as a magistrate, not promote him to be a District Court judge.
-
Ping Zhao
- Comments
- Remove Chen from the Court
-
Lishen Ying
- Comments
- Remove Chen from the Court and protect human rights.
-
Sharon Chen
- Comments
- Chen should be removed from the Court due to his misconducts at legal cases.
-
Ming Qin
- Comments
- opposition
-
lisa Fen
- Comments
- Chen is NOT qulified to be appointed.
-
Huilan Yang
- Comments
- against corruption in judicial system
-
Jack Meyer
- Comments
- I've lost hope in the judicial system.
-
Eric Zhu
- Comments
- Chen is a disgrace to all Asians
-
Joy Z.
- Comments
- I hope this man is punished
-
Ting G
- Comments
- Edward Chen is a liar
-
J Qian
- Comments
- remove chen from office immediately
-
Ken Zhang
- Comments
- Edward Chen - RESIGN NOW!
-
Mary Fisher
- Comments
- this magistrate's behavior is an abomination
-
Paul K
- Comments
- i can't believe he thought he could get away with his actions
-
Henry
- Comments
- our court system's blatant lies are finally revealed here
-
Wilson Jose
- Comments
- chen's actions offend all minorities
-
M Ronald
- Comments
- NO TO CHEN!
-
Lucy Sharma
- Comments
- As an Asian American, I'm especially angered to see this man be appointed. What will happen to my rights?
-
Meena Sampath
- Comments
- How could the state bar even give Edward Chen a license?
-
K Wang
- Comments
- This man is the epitome of injustice
-
Qin Feng
- Comments
- What an awful person!
-
Gary Lin
- Comments
- How does he sleep at night?
-
Xu K
- Comments
- i wonder if he still considers himself human
-
Jason Gupta
- Comments
- i fully support this petition
-
Lina Tao
- Comments
- obama was supposed to help civil rights, not remove them by nominating edward chen
-
Susie Chen
- Comments
- edward chen is social injustice at its peak
-
Xing P.
- Comments
- I hope Obama regrets nominating Edward Chen and immediately retracts it!
-
Alexander Chen
- Comments
- EDWARD CHEN MUST RESIGN NOW!
-
305
Signatures! - View Signatures
- Sign Petition