SI
SI
Advertise on SI

 Coffee Shop | Investment Chat Board Lawsuits


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: yardslave who wrote (11241)3/4/2011 12:34:41 PM
From: Buckey   of 11759
 
Oh hell ya There are people who will listen to sticky pink CEOs all the way to complete .0001 that the stock is naked shorted by evil bashing Canadians. Anyone see the SPNG shareholder letter this week. Look at CMKXers. The list is endless and the CEOs know they can deflect anger away from themn. of course we all know that 90% of thetime the selling ongoing ina penny scam is the insiders sleling not some evil naked short Canadian

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Buckey who wrote (11242)3/4/2011 12:38:33 PM
From: scion   of 11759
 
Honorable Judge Bernstein,

A while back, I wrote an email (Doc#232 attached) to the Trustee Mr. Silverman requesting that he publish the 400-450 page document that depicts the 50 Billion counterfeit shares present in Spongetech Delivery's (SPNG) share structure. To date that has not been done. Hence this email.

Your Honor, to give some background, the reason SPNG is in Bankruptcy is not due to cash flow problems nor is it due to a loan default as it had zero debt on its last filed balance sheet. SPNG had real products, established a shelf space/presence in 40,000+ retail stores, had very strong customer demand and was on the verge of high growth and job creation in the US. Unfortunately SPNG's business goals were not realized because of a vicious attack by Naked Short Sellers who decimated SPNG's share value by flooding the market with unauthorized, counterfeit shares. In addition these perpetrators directly or indirectly, maliciously inundated the SEC with emails alleging improper conduct by SPNG's management.

The SEC beseeched with these emails and without proper due diligence drove SPNG to its current situation. Thus far, the SEC/DOJ have not been able to provide discovery on its allegations and complaints on SPNG.

Your Honor, most importantly, Shareholders feel that the key to this case lies in the 450 page document depicting the 50 Billion counterfeit shares and full transparency to all of SPNG's stakeholders can only enable Judicial efficiency and effectiveness.

Wherefore, I respectfully request that Honorable Judge Bernstein enforce full transparency and compel Mr. Silverman to publish the 450 page report on NSS/counterfeit shares.

Your Honor, thank you for considering this request.

Respectfully,

A.Venkatesh
SPNG Shareholder
----------
OCR of
Doc 236 PDF file
viewer.zoho.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Buckey who wrote (11242)3/4/2011 4:08:09 PM
From: yardslave   of 11759
 
What is really troubling about this is that this continues to go on. 10-15 years ago it was a new story. But the same thing is going on today, and it is the exact same scam/story. And the story changes very little from scam to scam. One would think that after a while something new would be tried.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: yardslave who wrote (11244)3/4/2011 6:52:47 PM
From: Buckey   of 11759
 
but it still works so why change the scam

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: scion who wrote (11243)3/7/2011 3:18:22 PM
From: yardslave1 Recommendation   of 11759
 
There should be a law making it a felony crime for any pink sheet CEO to make the claim that naked short sellers are causing their pathetic stock to fall. This should be punishable for no less than 5 years in jail and perhaps a public caning. A trial is totally unnecessary these cases.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: scion who wrote (11237)3/7/2011 3:24:47 PM
From: scion   of 11759
 
Pacer update - 04 Mar 11 Kenneth Eade v. Investorshub.com, Inc. et al CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11-cv-01315-PA -CW

ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov 

Date Filed # Docket Text

03/04/2011 13 IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Percy Anderson. The Court orders Plaintiff to show cause in writing by 3/11/2011, why this action should not be transferred to a more convenient forum or dismissed for improper venue. Plaintiff is ordered to personally serve a copy of this Order on any defendant that has already been served within three (3) court days of the date of this Order or at the time of service for any defendant that has not already been served. (vdr) (Entered: 03/04/2011)

03/02/2011 12 SELF-REPRESENTATION ORDER by Judge Percy Anderson. One or more parties to this action has elected to appear pro se. *See order for procedures and requirements.* (vdr) (Entered: 03/03/2011)

03/02/2011 11 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT INVESTORSHUB.COM, INC.'S EX PARTE APPLICATION 6 TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT by Judge Percy Anderson. iHub's time to respond to the Complaint is extended to 3/21/2011. (vdr) (Entered: 03/03/2011)

Kenneth Eade v. Investorshub.com, Inc. et al

Assigned to: Judge Percy Anderson
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Carla Woehrle

Demand: $9,999,000
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander
Date Filed: 02/11/2011

Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 360 P.I.: Other
Jurisdiction: Diversity

Plaintiff
Kenneth Eade

represented by Kenneth G Eade
Kenneth G Eade Law Offices
6399 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 507
Los Angeles, CA 90048
323-782-8802
Fax: 310-861-0620
Email: keneade93101@yahoo.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
Investorshub.com, Inc.
a Florida corp.

Defendant
Doe 1
also known as
No Dummy

Defendant
Doe 2
also known as
Janice Shell

Defendant
Doe 3
also known as
Faster 183

Defendant
Doe 4
also known as
Stock Mavin

Defendant
Doe 5
also known as
Renee

Defendant
Doe 6
also known as
Virtual Drew

Defendant
Doe 7
also known as
Bob 41

Defendant
Doe 8
also known as
Overachiever

Defendant
Doe 9
also known as
Doberman

Defendant
Doe 10



ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: scion who wrote (11247)3/7/2011 3:33:24 PM
From: scion   of 11759
 
03/04/2011 13 IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Percy Anderson. The Court orders Plaintiff to show cause in writing by 3/11/2011, why this action should not be transferred to a more convenient forum or dismissed for improper venue. Plaintiff is ordered to personally serve a copy of this Order on any defendant that has already been served within three (3) court days of the date of this Order or at the time of service for any defendant that has not already been served. (vdr) (Entered: 03/04/2011)

Doc 13 PDF file
viewer.zoho.com 


Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS - COURT ORDER

Before the Court is the Complaint filed by plaintiff Kenneth Eade (“Plaintiff”) on February 11, 2011. The Complaint makes only conclusory allegations concerning venue and does not provide the facts necessary to establish personal jurisdiction over defendants in the Central District of California or to otherwise satisfy the requirements for venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Indeed, because the Complaint alleges that Plaintiff is a citizen of Arizona, and that the only defendant not named as a “Doe” is a citizen of Missouri and Florida, it appears that the District of Arizona, or one of the Districts in Missouri or Florida, and not the Central District of California, might be the proper venue for this action.

The Court therefore orders Plaintiff to show cause in writing by March 11, 2011, why this action should not be transferred to a more convenient forum or dismissed for improper venue. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404, 1406.

Plaintiff is ordered to personally serve a copy of this Order on any defendant that has already been served within three (3) court days of the date of this Order or at the time of service for any defendant that has not already been served.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: scion who wrote (11248)3/7/2011 3:37:11 PM
From: scion   of 11759
 
03/02/2011 11 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT INVESTORSHUB.COM, INC.'S EX PARTE APPLICATION 6 TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT by Judge Percy Anderson. iHub's time to respond to the Complaint is extended to 3/21/2011. (vdr) (Entered: 03/03/2011)

Doc 11 PDF file
viewer.zoho.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: scion who wrote (11230)3/8/2011 12:03:00 PM
From: scion   of 11759
 
Pacer update 07 Mar 11 - INVESTORSHUB COM INC v. MINA MAR GROUP INC - CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:11-cv-00009-RH -WCS

ecf.flnd.uscourts.gov 

Date Filed # Docket Text

03/07/2011 8 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (SHULLMAN, DEANNA) (Entered: 03/07/2011)



U.S. District Court
Northern District of Florida (Tallahassee)

CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:11-cv-00009-RH -WCS

INVESTORSHUB COM INC v. MINA MAR GROUP INC

Assigned to: JUDGE ROBERT L HINKLE
Referred to: MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM C SHERRILL, JR
Cause: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgement (Insurance)
Date Filed: 01/10/2011
Jury Demand: None

Nature of Suit: 890 Other Statutory Actions
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
INVESTORSHUB COM INC
A FLORIDA CORPORATION

represented by DEANNA K SHULLMAN
THOMAS & LOCICERO - FT LAUDERDALE FL
101 NE THIRD AVE STE 1500
FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301
954-332-3619
Fax: 877-967-2244
Email: deanna.shullman@tlolawfirm.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

PAUL RUSSELL MCADOO
THOMAS & LOCICERO - TAMPA FL
400 N ASHLEY DR STE 1100
TAMPA, FL 33602
813-984-3060
Fax: 813-984-3070
Email: pmcadoo@tlolawfirm.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
ROBERT ZUMBRUNNEN
AN INDIVIDUAL

represented by DEANNA K SHULLMAN
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

PAUL RUSSELL MCADOO
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
MATTHEW BROWN
AN INDIVIDUAL

represented by DEANNA K SHULLMAN
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

PAUL RUSSELL MCADOO
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED


V.

Defendant
MINA MAR GROUP INC
A FOREIGN CORPORATION

represented by THOMAS MARSHALL FINDLEY
MESSER CAPARELLO & SELF PA - TALLAHASSEE FL
2618 CENTENNIAL PL
TALLAHASSEE, FL 32308
850/222-0720
Fax: 850/224-4359
Email: tfindley@lawfla.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
MINA MAR GROUP INC OF THE USA
other
EMRY CAPITAL GROUP INC

represented by THOMAS MARSHALL FINDLEY
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
MIRO ZECEVIC
AN INDIVIDUAL

represented by THOMAS MARSHALL FINDLEY
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

ecf.flnd.uscourts.gov 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: scion who wrote (11250)3/8/2011 12:07:13 PM
From: scion   of 11759
 
03/07/2011 8 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (SHULLMAN, DEANNA) (Entered: 03/07/2011)

Doc 8 PDF file
viewer.zoho.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.