> In this particular case, the defendant is licensed as an engineer.

The first linked document in the article states that the defendant is not licensed by any state.

An odd statement to make, considering that his defense was that he doesn't need to be licensed engineer to call himself an engineer.

Where is he licensed? Why is he not licensed in Oregon, despite having been timely notified, without penalty, of the requirement to do so if he wished to claim that title? Why did he agree to abide by this requirement then break his agreement within months?