Sicoherence™

The public record shows that I built the framework, published the research, released the book, and established the intellectual foundation before The Celestial Group attempted to claim a competing commercial identity.

By Brian K. Burwell II | Sicoherence

Author’s note: This article presents my conclusions and allegations based on my original records, public publications, website materials, and the pending federal trademark record. No court or tribunal has yet determined that The Celestial Group or Tracy Yates infringed my intellectual-property rights.

There is a familiar pattern in the treatment of independent creators.

First, the creator performs the difficult work in relative obscurity. The creator develops the language, tests the ideas, publishes the research, builds the architecture, and takes the risk of introducing something the established market does not yet recognize.

Then, once the work becomes visible, a better-positioned party arrives with cleaner corporate packaging, professional counsel, institutional language, and a trademark application.

The originator is left explaining that the polished imitation came after the original.

That is what I believe is happening with Structural Intelligence.

I did not encounter Structural Intelligence as a marketing trend. I developed it as part of a much larger research and systems-architecture program through Crown State of Mind LLC. It emerged from my work involving the Sefirot, hierarchical attenuation, coherence, identity engineering, source fidelity, organizational alignment, computational systems, culture, governance, artificial intelligence, and institutional design.

My work is not represented by one vague slogan. It exists as a documented intellectual corpus.

The Work Existed Before the Trademark Application

Throughout 2025, I published foundational research establishing the architecture from which Structural Intelligence developed. That record includes papers such as:

• A Mathematical and Experimental Model of the Sefirot as a Conceptual Framework for Hierarchical Energy Decay
• Identity Engineering Theory
• Structure, Values, Coherence: A Systems-Based Model for Stable Inner and Organizational Alignment
• Ein Sof as a Self-Consistent, Rule-Driven System
• Sefirotic Consciousness Transfer Theory
• An Integration Framework for Updating Inner Consciousness

These were not disconnected essays. Together, they documented a developing structural system involving layers, coherence, attenuation, information flow, identity, organizational alignment, decision architecture, and the movement of ideas from source to manifestation. My Crown State of Mind research archive preserves these works alongside their Zenodo records and digital object identifiers.

In October 2025, I also filed a provisional patent application covering the underlying Sefirot technical architecture. That application addressed concrete computational mechanisms involving attenuation across linear, nonlinear, and graph-based systems.

I then published my book, Structural Intelligence: A New Category of Human Understanding, on Amazon on January 9, 2026. The book publicly presented Structural Intelligence as a developed framework—not merely as two attractive words placed together for a consulting campaign.

My later research expanded Structural Intelligence into artificial intelligence, digital platforms, organizational systems, governance, cultural analysis, music, historical interpretation, institutional design, and source-fidelity analysis. The Crown State of Mind archive now contains numerous publications expressly bearing the Structural Intelligence name and applying the framework across multiple disciplines.

This is what an intellectual origin record looks like.

It is a body of research.

It is a developmental sequence.

It is a book.

It is a technical architecture.

It is a continuing framework with documented applications.

Then Came “VEYRA STRUCTURAL INTELLIGENCE”

On February 10, 2026—approximately one month after my Structural Intelligence book was published—The Celestial Group filed a federal trademark application for VEYRA STRUCTURAL INTELLIGENCE.

The pending application is owned by The Celestial Group and bears serial number 99644644. It claims first use and first use in commerce on December 18, 2025. As of June 10, 2026, the application remained pending and had received a nonfinal Office action.

For accuracy, The Celestial Group did not apply for the standalone wording STRUCTURAL INTELLIGENCE. It added the word VEYRA. But adding a word before the exact name of my published framework does not eliminate the underlying concern—especially when the proposed mark is directed toward overlapping commercial fields.

The trademark application covers business-transformation consulting, strategic planning, organizational performance, operational effectiveness, leadership decision-making, software development, system architectures, analytical frameworks, structural coordination, decision intelligence, digital diagnostics, and software-as-a-service offerings.

That description does not place the mark in an unrelated industry.

It places VEYRA STRUCTURAL INTELLIGENCE directly inside the territory where I had already been developing Structural Intelligence: systems, decision structures, organizational alignment, technology, analysis, coherence, and institutional performance.

A Competing Website Built Around Similar Positioning

The Celestial Group now operates a website promoting organizational and systems-architecture services.

Its homepage promises to solve challenges at the “right layer,” restore “synchronized execution,” improve precise decision-making, and address organizational performance through design. It repeatedly discusses layers, system-wide coordination, structure, momentum, capacity, and decisions moving in sync.

Its About page describes an approach involving coordination, real-time resolution, compounding outcomes, stability, precision, organizational capacity, and access to systems architects working across technology, finance, governance, and culture. The same page identifies Tracy Yates as the company’s founder and CEO.

General words such as “systems,” “layers,” “structure,” and “coordination” are not individually owned by anyone. I am not claiming that every person who discusses systems thinking has copied me.

The concern is the combination and chronology:

• I developed and documented a layered structural framework.
• I published the supporting research.
• I filed the underlying provisional patent.
• I published a book called Structural Intelligence.
• A competing systems-architecture company then applied to trademark VEYRA STRUCTURAL INTELLIGENCE.
• Its application targeted system architecture, structural coordination, analytical frameworks, decision intelligence, organizational performance, and software.
• Its website began presenting a commercial system using closely adjacent structural and organizational positioning.

Taken together, I do not view this as an innocent naming coincidence.

I view it as appropriation.

What I Am—and Am Not—Claiming

I am not claiming that I invented the ordinary English words “structural” or “intelligence.”

I am not claiming that no one in history has ever placed those words beside each other.

My position is more specific:

I created and publicly documented a defined framework called Structural Intelligence, supported it with an extensive body of original research, connected it to a technical Sefirot architecture, published a book under that name, and developed it as part of the Crown State of Mind intellectual-property ecosystem before The Celestial Group filed its federal application.

I further allege that The Celestial Group’s later adoption of VEYRA STRUCTURAL INTELLIGENCE, combined with its attempt to commercialize system architecture, analytical frameworks, structural coordination, decision intelligence, and organizational performance, appropriates the identity and commercial territory of my work.

A final legal determination would require examination of priority, access, substantial similarity, trademark use, specimens, internal development records, and the complete history of both parties’ materials.

But the absence of a final legal judgment does not require me to ignore the public timeline.

The record exists.

Institutional Packaging Does Not Create Intellectual Origin

Independent creators are frequently placed at a structural disadvantage.

A creator may spend years building an idea but lack immediate access to trademark counsel, institutional press, venture capital, public-relations teams, and professional filing infrastructure. A later entrant can move quickly, present a polished corporate identity, and attempt to occupy the commercial space surrounding work it did not originate.

That creates a dangerous inversion:

The person with the strongest paperwork can appear to be the creator, while the actual creator is forced to prove that the paperwork came later.

But registration is not creation.

Corporate packaging is not authorship.

Access to attorneys is not intellectual origin.

The filing of a trademark application does not erase the books, papers, models, drafts, patent records, publication dates, and digital archives that preceded it.

Structural Intelligence belongs to a documented lineage of work developed through Crown State of Mind. It cannot honestly be separated from the Sefirot architecture, coherence theory, source-fidelity model, identity engineering, hierarchical attenuation research, and cross-domain applications that gave it meaning.

The name did not arrive first and receive a framework afterward.

The framework produced the name.

A Call for Transparency

The Celestial Group and Tracy Yates should explain publicly:

• When the phrase VEYRA STRUCTURAL INTELLIGENCE was first conceived.
• Who conceived it.
• What documents support the claimed December 18, 2025 first-use date.
• What research preceded the development of their alleged framework.
• Whether anyone associated with the company encountered my publications, websites, book materials, research pages, or related CSM content.
• Why its trademark application entered the same commercial territory as my documented Structural Intelligence framework.
• How its system differs, technically and conceptually, from the work I had already developed.

They should also preserve all documents, communications, design files, web-development records, trademark instructions, drafts, research materials, and internal discussions related to the selection and development of the mark.

Transparency should not be difficult for a company claiming independent creation.

Source Fidelity Requires Origin Recognition

Structural Intelligence teaches that coherence depends on preserving the relationship between source, transmission, and manifestation.

When the source is removed, the visible product becomes disconnected from the intelligence that produced it. The result may appear polished, but it is structurally incoherent because origin has been erased.

That is the deeper issue here.

This dispute is not merely about a phrase.

It is about whether independent creators are allowed to remain attached to the systems they originate—or whether institutions can wait until those systems become commercially useful, rename them, package them, and attempt to control their market identity.

I created the Structural Intelligence framework.

I documented its development.

I published its foundations.

I released the book.

I built the research archive.

I connected it to a broader technical and intellectual architecture.

The public record should be examined in its proper sequence.

Structural Intelligence did not begin with a February 2026 trademark application.

It was already here.