Judge Thomas Wheeler / Gary Hausken US Atty

Judicial Misconduct Complaint: https://www.scribd.com/document/389796652/2017-COMPLAINT-OF-MISCONDUCT-JUDGE-THOMAS-C-WHEELER-Federal-District-Court-of-Claims

Supplemental Complaint Info: https://www.scribd.com/document/389796808/Supplemental-Info-for-Judge-Wheeler-Complaint

Brief Statement of Facts:

This complaint involves Judge Thomas C. Wheeler, a federal judge sitting on the Federal District Court of Claims. We believe that probable cause exists to conclude that Judge Wheeler engaged in egregious misconduct adversely affecting public confidence in the judicial system.

Demodulation is a small New Jersey based business that was suing the U.S. Government for the theft of its trade secrets and other offenses before the Wheeler Court. The litigation lasted five years until Demodulation was forced to drop its appeal because the case had been so despoiled by the unethical actions of members of the Court making any further pursuit of an appeal fruitless.

It is alleged that Judge Wheeler failed to properly oversee the integrity of the attorneys litigating before his Court in the matter of Demodulation. Judge Wheeler ignored significant evidence indicating that gross unethical conduct was taking place by attorneys litigating the case of Demodulation before him— the attorneys for both the plaintiff and the defense were involved.

Judge Wheeler was aware, or certainly should have been aware, of the egregious ethical misconduct of the attorneys representing Demodulation in the litigation before his Court. Judge Wheeler was provided ample evidence that Demodulation was not being properly represented by their attorneys in documents presented to him for review—including a particularly noteworthy compilation of evidence presented to the Court as part of a Markman Brief.

COMPLAINT OF MISCONDUCT: JUDGE THOMAS C. WHEELER

Moreover, Judge Wheeler, either wittingly or unwittingly, took actions that resulted in the obstruction of justice in the matter of Demodulation by repeatedly sanctioning the Demodulation plaintiff for actions that were completely outside his control. In many cases, the basis of the charges was never verified by Judge Wheeler based on any inquiry as to whether U.S. Government counsel was being truthful—which he was not. In one example, when Demodulation’s lawyers intentionally distributed court protected information to Demodulation’s experts without telling them, Judge Wheeler used the occasion not to assure the integrity of the process, but rather to dismiss with prejudice Demodulation’s entire trade secrets cause of action in an act of manifest injustice. Please note that we are not raising the issue of the merit of the Judge Wheeler’s rulings, but rather his inherent responsibility as a judge to oversee the integrity of the judicial process including the ethical conduct of the officers of his own Court.

It is also noted that U.S. Government defense counsel Hausken, violated the ethical rules of professional conduct for practicing attorneys by abandoning his duty, as a member of the bar, to be an objective purveyor of fact before the Court. Mr. Hausken was fully aware that Demodulation was not receiving adequate representation from their attorneys in the case, i.e., the Callagy and McKenna Law Firms, but failed to report this fact to the proper authorities as he is required to do under the rules of professional conduct for practicing attorneys. Instead, Mr. Hausken engaged in gamesmanship and numerous bad acts to garner improper advantage over the plaintiff and to manipulate the Court. Mr. Hausken’s overzealousness to win the Demodulation case at all costs demined his integrity. Mr. Hausken’s complicity in the obstruction of justice does not, however, absolve Judge Wheeler of his responsibility to actively oversee the integrity of attorneys litigating in his Court, including Mr. Hausken, which he did not do.

Judge Wheeler allowed counsel for the plaintiff to engage in what he knew was unethical behavior as set forth in the Markman Brief presented to the Court. While he did sanction the plaintiff on many occasions, Judge Wheeler’s sanctions were based on his desire to clear the case of Demodulation off of his Court’s docket. Judge Wheeler never addressed the true underlying causes or circumstances resulting in the sanctions thus abdicating his responsibility for overseeing the integrity of the officers of his Court involved in the litigation of the Demodulation matter.