Founder's Protocol Statement: Inventorship, Licensing Control & Enforcement
Dated: June 20, 2025
Declaration Regarding Termination of License and Pattern of Misconduct by John and Gregory Graziano
Termination of License Agreement with the Graziano Brothers – Effective June 1, 2025
The licensing agreement extended to John and Gregory Graziano was officially terminated effective June 1, 2025, following a 90-day notice period during which they were given an opportunity to cure multiple material breaches. These breaches include, un-paid licensing fees of $4,526.39, unauthorized representations, misuse of confidential materials, interference with prospective licensees, and failure to adhere to the protocols stipulated in the governing agreement dated November 1, 2024, and ratified May 23, 2025.
One brother stabilizing, while the other one does whatever he wants, Licensee, what License, this is mine, because I want it. It's like when you were 2.5 and some kid takes your pail and Mom says you have to share, and you're like what, share, that kid is a dick.
A bit more complicated, but that's it in a nutshell. I'm taking it. I'm a notary. I'm above the law. He once said the law doesn't take kindly to people who expose, notaries like me.
Despite repeated warnings and attempts to clarify boundaries, the Graziano brothers continued to act in a manner that directly undermined the purpose and spirit of the licensing arrangement.
Clarification Regarding John Graziano’s Involvement
John Graziano has consistently stated that he was merely trying to help me “in any way possible.” However, the documented facts reflect a far more coordinated and intentional relationship between John and his brother Gregory Graziano. The two have shared resources, operated from the same physical location at 160 Wilbur Place, and have repeatedly inserted themselves—often in parallel roles—into licensing and commercialization activities without authorization.
John’s portrayal of himself as a detached supporter is contradicted by patterns of behavior that suggest either complicity or willful blindness to Gregory’s ongoing misconduct. Whether acting passively or actively, John’s role has had the effect of legitimizing his brother’s destabilizing actions.
On the Unauthorized Access and Opportunistic Conduct by the Graziano Brothers
It remains a critical and deeply troubling fact that Gregory Graziano attempted to unlawfully access my private USPTO account, claiming he was assisting with a response to an office action. This action was taken without my request, my knowledge, or my consent. Adding to the gravity of the violation, Gregory also physically removed documents related to a different office action from my vehicle. When questioned, he attempted to justify the intrusion by asserting that my car was “on their property.”
This behavior cannot be explained away as a misunderstanding or overreach in service of assistance. Instead, it exemplifies a clear pattern of opportunism—one that deliberately exploits grey areas to engage in conduct that, while difficult to prosecute on its face, violates the trust and integrity essential to lawful business relationships.
In a further escalation, it has come to my attention that my email communications were tampered with, including the replacement of intended recipients at the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office with Megan Adamo, an officer from Nassau County. These actions suggest the Graziano brothers engaged in unauthorized digital interference, evidently with the intent to misdirect or dilute the consequences of my complaints. Such tampering represents a serious breach of privacy and may constitute criminal conduct under state and federal law.
It has also been brought to my attention that the Graziano brothers attempted to interfere with my participation in the Cleantech Open accelerator program by accessing internal systems and communications without authorization. In one alarming instance, they added the name of their niece to a list of invitees, without consent, in what appears to be an effort to insert themselves into strategic opportunities under false pretenses and to gain access to private meetings with my mentors—or at minimum to create the optics that they were involved in Cleantech activities. This behavior demonstrates a disturbing pattern of impersonation, intrusion, and deception consistent with their broader strategy of destabilization.
On the Conflation of Licensing Terms and Manipulation of Documentation
Further compounding the misconduct, John Graziano engaged in the deliberate conflation of terms set forth in the executed license agreements with unrelated and fabricated promissory notes, in what appears to be an effort to obscure the actual structure and enforceability of the licensing relationship. This tactic created confusion about the nature of the rights conveyed and the obligations owed, both to me as the licensor and to third parties potentially involved in transactions or sub-license discussions.
In addition, it has come to my attention that John Graziano backdated signatures on licensing agreements—specifically the agreement dated November 1, 2024, ratified May 23, 2025—which he never intended to honor in good faith. These actions strongly suggest that his participation in the licensing process was not undertaken with honest intent, but rather as part of a calculated strategy to create a veneer of legitimacy while positioning himself and his brother to benefit improperly from my intellectual property.
This manipulation of legally binding documents, especially those submitted or referenced in federal and contractual settings, constitutes not only a material breach of contract but also a potentially fraudulent act warranting further investigation by civil and criminal authorities.
Witness Statement: Attempt to Replace Enforceable License Agreement with Promissory Note
I was a direct witness to John Graziano’s deliberate attempt to replace an enforceable license agreement—executed on November 1, 2024 and ratified on May 23, 2025—with a fabricated promissory note. This act was not only unauthorized and misleading, but clearly intended to erase the continuity and binding authority of the licensing relationship I had lawfully established.
The effort to swap a properly structured license for a loosely worded, non-binding promissory note was not a misunderstanding. It was a calculated maneuver designed to undermine my role as sole licensor, obscure the paper trail, and weaken my position in any subsequent enforcement action. By doing so, John Graziano sought to dissolve the formal record of my rights while creating a parallel narrative that he could exploit for personal or commercial benefit.
This manipulation of terms, timing, and signatures cannot be viewed in isolation—it forms part of a broader pattern of interference and misrepresentation by both John and Gregory Graziano. Their actions have had the cumulative effect of robbing me of continuity, credibility, and commercial opportunity, while placing legitimate stakeholders at risk of dealing with individuals who lack authority or good faith.
Conclusion
Together, the actions of John and Gregory Graziano constitute a coordinated pattern of misconduct. They have attempted to operate within the shadow of legality while subverting the lawful, exclusive ownership of my proprietary technologies and platforms.
Their license has been terminated, and I reserve all rights—civil and criminal—to pursue further action.
Signed:
Yonatan Zvi Margalit
Sole Inventor & Owner
