WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. — A man who was fired by IBM for visiting an adult chat room at work is suing the company for $5 million, claiming he is an Internet addict who deserves treatment and sympathy rather than dismissal.

James Pacenza, 58, of Montgomery, N.Y., says he visits chat rooms to treat traumatic stress incurred in 1969 when he saw his best friend killed during an Army patrol in Vietnam.

In papers filed in federal court in White Plains, Pacenza said the stress caused him to become "a sex addict, and with the development of the Internet, an Internet addict." He claimed protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

His lawyer, Michael Diederich, says Pacenza never visited pornographic sites at work, violated no written IBM rule and did not surf the Internet any more or any differently than other employees. He also says age discrimination contributed to IBM's actions. Pacenza, 55 at the time, had been with the company for 19 years.

International Business Machines Corp. has asked Judge Stephen Robinson for a summary judgment, saying its policy against surfing sexual Web sites is clear. It also claims Pacenza was told he could lose his job after an incident four months earlier; Pacenza denies that.

"Plaintiff was discharged by IBM because he visited an Internet chat room for a sexual experience during work after he had been previously warned," the company said.

IBM also said sexual-behavior disorders are specifically excluded from the ADA and denied any age discrimination.

If it goes to trial, the case could affect how employers regulate Internet use that is not work-related, or how Internet overuse is categorized medically. Stanford University issued a nationwide study last year that found that up to 14 percent of computer users reported neglecting work, school, families, food and sleep to use the Internet.

Pacenza was making $65,000 a year operating a machine at a plant in East Fishkill, N.Y., that makes computer chips.

Several times during the day, machine operators are idle for five to 10 minutes as the tool measures the thickness of silicon wafers.

It was during such down time on May 28, 2003, that Pacenza logged onto a chat room from his workstation.

Diederich says Pacenza had returned that day from visiting the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington and logged onto a site called ChatAvenue and then to an adult chat room.

Pacenza, who has a wife and two children, said using the Internet at work was encouraged by IBM and served as "a form of self-medication" for post-traumatic stress disorder.

He said he tried to stay away from chat rooms at work, but that day, "I felt I needed the interactive engagement of chat talk to divert my attention from my thoughts of Vietnam and death."

BANGOR (Feb 19): A Native American group comprised of prison inmates is suing Maine State Prison Warden Jeffrey Merrill, among other prison officials, for refusing to permit the group reasonable accommodations to practice its religion.

The group, Sacred Feather, has 27 members and was formed in December 1998. It filed a similar lawsuit against Merrill in May 2003, but the case was dismissed seven months later in December of that year. According to the most recent lawsuit, the 2003 case was dismissed and attorneys for the Maine Department of Corrections and Sacred Feather entered into a settlement agreement, which expired, as stipulated, on Dec. 23, 2005.

Since that time, Sacred Feather alleges it has attempted to retain "religious freedom" and "quality of religious practices" afforded other religious faith inmate groups, to no avail.

One of the things that has not been in keeping with fair treatment, according to Sacred Feather, has been the requirement that smudging ceremonies take place in a location described as a high-traffic area of the prison grounds.

In a smudging ceremony, sacred tobacco and sweet grass are burned in a ceremonial smudge bowl. Then, as group members stand in a circle in prayer, the resulting smoke is blown onto each member's face and body with an eagle feather.

Holding the smudging ceremony between buildings in a heavily traveled part of the prison's outdoor yard results in "many onlookers and derogatory comments made both from passing non-Native American inmates and from prison guards," claims Sacred Feather.

In the court document, Sacred Feather states that its Native American members are entitled to practice their religion with dignity and with accommodations equal to those afforded to Catholic and Protestant groups. Sacred Feather alleges that continues to not be the case at Maine State Prison.

Sacred Feather points to the prison's provision of a chapel where Catholics and Protestants can privately practice their religions and of office space and funds to purchase office supplies and other items needed to practice their religious faith.

"Catholics are provided weekly services, their own priest, inmate clerks and the ability to take Communion every week," states the court document. "Candles are burned during the weekly services, and holidays of special religious significance, like Christmas, Easter and Ash Wednesday, are also fully observed and accommodated at the prison."

Sacred Feather also alleges that accommodations are provided for Protestant Kairos groups in the prison but not for the Native American group. One example cited is the prison's provision of a space for the inmate Protestant group and an outside Protestant group to conduct their Kairos ceremony, for which the prison also provides, without charge, extra guards to monitor the large group.

Sacred Feather alleges that prison officials have failed to provide religious items agreed to when the group first formed in 1998, including a medicine bag, drums, eagle feathers, sweet grass, a sacred pipe, tobacco ties, sage, cedar and a smudge bowl.

Sacred Feather further alleges that prison officials have canceled smudging ceremonies more than 18 times since 2003 and have not provided a shelter for smudging ceremonies held in inclement weather.

"Reasons for the cancellations range from 'No officers are available' or 'We are not feeling like it,'" states Sacred Feather in the court document.

And despite earlier agreeing to continue to communicate about whether it is possible to erect a sweat lodge for sweat lodge ceremonies, prison officials have been reluctant to communicate about resolving the issue, alleges Sacred Feather.

"Prison officials have also denied the plaintiffs powwows, ceremonial foods and ceremonial music," states Sacred Feather in the court document. "Though the defendants plan, prepare and pay for ceremonial foods of Christian religions at major Christian holidays, no such accommodation is made for Native American festivals or holy days."

Sacred Feather is demanding that the court find in its favor in terms of it being entitled to the same level of accommodation and dignity as inmates practicing Christian religions.

Sacred Feather is seeking the right to hold twice-weekly smudging ceremonies and twice-monthly pipe ceremonies, in a location that provides privacy and does not subject the ceremonies to cancellation due to inclement weather. It also seeks permission to construct a sweat lodge, and to hold sweat-lodge ceremonies at least monthly.

Sacred Feather also seeks to have its members be allowed to retain religious items in their prison cells in order to practice their religion daily, as well as entitlement to a proportionate share of the funds provided to other religious groups at the prison.

Along with requiring that Merrill issue a directive to his staff prohibiting any form of retaliation against members of the group, Sacred Feather also asks the court to issue an order permanently prohibiting prison officials from engaging in any of the conduct alleged in the complaint.

In addition to costs and fees associated with filing the lawsuit, Sacred Feather also seeks unspecified damages to compensate for the violation of its constitutional rights, and asks that the court award damages in an amount Sacred Feather would have received for religious purposes dating back to Dec. 16, 1998, equivalent to the amounts received by the other religious prison groups during that same period.

Since its founding in 1976, Fleischman and Walsh, L.L.P. has effectively served its clients in the telecommunications, cable television, broadcasting, energy, transportation, corporate, and financial areas, representing large international and domestic corporations, established and start-up companies, and individuals and closely held entities, helping each client to achieve its optimum goals.

Being a mid-sized firm, Fleischman and Walsh, L.L.P. is the ideal size for personalized and highly specialized client service. We seek to represent each of our clients, large or small, with a thorough, thoughtful and result-oriented approach.

Fleischman and Walsh, L.L.P Specialty

Cable Television

The firm has an unparalleled depth and breadth of knowledge, experience, and ability in cable television law. We represent our cable television clients on a full range of matters arising before the FCC, such as rate regulation, must carry/retransmission consent, customer service standards, leased access, subscriber privacy, EEO, program access and affiliation agreements, licensing, rulemakings, and special relief and waiver petitions, as well as all types of ownership issues. We also assist with copyright matters, including the resolution of disputes before the U.S. Copyright Office and issues before other federal agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, Department of Justice, Department of Agriculture, Rural Utilities Service, Federal Aviation Administration, and Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

On the local level, we help our cable clients in their relations with local and state franchising authorities regarding matter such as franchise renewals, modifications and transfers, rate increases, and franchise fees. Our regulatory attorneys work closely with our corporate and securities group to ensure that cable system sales, acquisitions, refinancings, and other transactional matters are handled in the most efficient and effective manner.

Increasingly, our cable practice has involved competitive issues, such as system overbuilds, direct broadcast satellites (DBS), wireless cable, open video systems, rate uniformity, access to programming, marketing practices, access to multiple-dwelling buildings, and ownership of internal wiring. And as our clients have entered into Internet access, voice over Internet protocol, and other new lines of business, our practice has evolved with them, allowing us to offer advice and counsel on the telecommunications, intellectual property, antitrust and other legal issues raised by these endeavors.

We are also involved in state and federal legislative matters affecting cable television, assisting the National Cable Television Association and other clients in connection with various proposals pending before Congress and the FCC from time to time, including the 1996 Telecommunications Act, the 1992 Cable Act, and the 1984 Cable Act. We also represent state cable television trade associations in connection with state legislative and regulatory issues and federal proposals with state-wide impact.

Our cable television clients include several of the nation's largest and most prominent multiple-system operators, growing medium-sized companies and smaller, privately owned entities. We also represent established and start-up cable programming networks, as well as brokerage firms, lenders, equipment manufacturers and others involved in various aspects of the cable industry.

www.fw-law.com

Apple Inc. has another week to respond to Cisco Systems Inc.'s trademark infringement lawsuit that threatens to keep Apple from using the name "iPhone" on its much-hyped cell phone-music player.

After the companies had previously agreed to extend the deadline until Thursday night, the world's largest networking equipment maker said Apple now has until Wednesday to respond to the lawsuit filed last month in San Francisco federal court.

Both companies reiterated previous statements that they want to use the extra time to reach a settlement.

Cisco, whose Linksys division began shipping a line of iPhones last spring, has said it would allow Apple to use the trademarked name but wants both companies' phones to be able to communicate with each other. It has not provided details of such interoperability.

Apple has called the lawsuit "silly" and argued that it's entitled to use the iPhone name because the phones operate over different networks. Apple's works using cellular technology, and Cisco's operates over the Internet using a technology called Voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP.

Cisco has owned the trademark since 2000, when it acquired InfoGear Technology Corp., which originally registered the name.

A lawyer pleaded guilty to stealing more than $20 million from a bank and at least one client, spending the loot on vacation homes, a wedding and generous salaries for his employees, authorities said.

Under a deal with prosecutors, Anthony Bellettieri, 53, faces more than a decade in prison after admitting Thursday in federal court to bank and mail fraud dating to at least 2003.

AdvertisementBellettieri, a real estate lawyer, stole the funds through check kiting – taking money from his law firm's escrow account and writing checks on another account to cover the escrow account's losses.
According to J.P. Morgan Chase, the primary victim, the tactic worked partly because he used checks with a printed error. The scheme fell apart after the bank issued correct checks in November.

Authorities said Bellettieri also convinced a client to invest almost $2 million in phony private mortgages.

Defense lawyer Murray Richman told The Journal News, “It's a terrible thing to see a man destroyed and humbled by his own actions and lose control of his life.”

Prosecutor Cynthia Keefe Dunne said the stolen money paid for, among other things, a swimming pool at Bellettieri's Pleasantville home, a family wedding, high salaries for the law firm's workers and condos in Miami Beach and Aruba.

Bellettieri was released on $500,000 bond. Sentencing is May 18. His plea agreement requires him to pay as much as $22 million in restitution and forfeit properties he purchased.