Investment Chat Board Lawsuits | Stock Discussion Forums

SiliconInvestor

sponsor

Sponsor

Coffee Shop | Investment Chat Board Lawsuits

Previous 10 | Next 10

From: StockDung	3/28/2012 7:14:15 PM
	of 11756

Gmail Users Get Help to Stay Masked Before SEC By SANTI SUTHINITHET (CN) - A group dedicated to online privacy hopes to shield anonymous Gmail users whom the Securities and Exchange Commission have subpoenaed as part of an investigation into a coffee company connected to the late reggae artist Bob Marley. Jammmin Java, which is chaired by Bob /Marley's son Rohan, attracted regulators' scrutiny when its share prices rose and fell within a short span of time from late 2010 to early 2011. Investigating the possibility of a pump-and-dump scheme, the SEC subpoenaed three Gmail users known only by their email addresses. The agency claims that, "the increase in Jammin Java's share price occurred notwithstanding the fact that Jammin Java's public filings during that time period reflected that Jammin Java was a shell company that had generated no revenues and had an accumulated deficit of $511,760." It also alleges that the fluctuating stock prices coincide with Jammin Java's "materially misleading" online newsletters. After the SEC issued the first subpoena in June 2011 to identify the individual behind marketingacesinc@gmail.com, a motion to quash appeared anonymously two months later. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer dismissed the motion, leading the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) to intervene on appeal. "In the immediate case, the Securities and Exchange Commission seeks to obtain the identities of anonymous speakers based not on any evidentiary showing but on its own conclusory assertions that the information is needed to investigate misconduct," according to the amicus brief authored by EFF staff attorney Matt Zimmerman. "The SEC has not explained why it has targeted the Gmail account holders, nor has it even identified any newsletters in question, much less link the users to any allegedly illegal activities," Zimmerman added. "The right to engage in anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment, and "the SEC cannot unmask anonymous online speakers absent an evidentiary showing supporting a compelling state interest," the brief states. "In rejecting the plaintiffs-appellants' motions to quash, and permitting the agency to simply posit arguments in support of its investigation, the District Court effectively endorsed a standard by which the SEC can pierce the anonymity of online speakers based entirely on the speculation of the agency," Zimmerman wrote. Breyer allegedly misstated minimal requirements imposed under the summary-judgment standard used to evaluate anonymity rights in the context of online speech. "The District Court's interpretation of the standard, apparently one in which the issuing party would have to provide evidence sufficient to prevail upon an affirmative summary judgment motion, is simply incorrect and sets the investigatory bar far higher than the standards suggested by either appellants or prior case law," the brief states. The EFF further noted that, "while the SEC's investigation may (or may not) eventually prove fruitful and its theories prove correct (or not), none of the information provided by the SEC meets the required First Amendment evidentiary threshold." "The government declines, for example, not only to include the 'online newsletters touting Jammin' Java's stock' on which the investigation appears to be based for the Court to review, but also to identify when they were published, or what the specific allegedly suspicious contents were," Zimmerman added. "Similarly, it fails to explain with any specificity what John Doe has to do with the matter. ... The SEC has identified a series of disparate facts and has, without explanation or detail, added its unsupported conclusions. Such naked conclusions hardly amount to evidence indicating a rational relationship to a compelling governmental interest." "Anonymity receives the same constitutional protection whether the means of communication is a political leaflet or an Internet message board," the brief concludes. It is not arduous for the government to support its subpoena with evidence, as required by the First Amendment, according to the EFF. 'As courts have explained in cases addressing attempts to obtain online identity information through the use of discovery subpoenas, such a requirement is designed to provide a modicum of protection to a speaker whose First Amendment right to anonymity would be irrevocably lost once his or her identity was disclosed," the brief states.

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

To: scion who wrote (11598)

3/28/2012 10:57:37 PM

From: StockDung

of 11756

Eade once sued me on behalf of Nutra Pharma and my crime? Posting an article on SI that our-street.com had written To: Francois Goelo who wrote ( 10156)	5/22/2005 8:18:51 PM
From: StockDung	of 19392

Insider & Form 144 Filings - HEYSEK, TOM & REGAN Last Updated 17-May-05 Enter symbol: symbol lookup HEYSEK, TOM & REGAN: Declared Holdings Company/Relationship Reported Shares Ownership NUTRA PHARMA CORP Private or Shareholder OTC BB:NPHC.OB (historical quotes, profile, SEC, other insiders) 2004-12-22 not reported Insider & restricted shareholder transactions reported over the last two years Date Shares Stock Transaction 22-Dec-04 120,000 NPHC.OB Planned Sale (Estimated proceeds of $34,800) =================================================== 66.102.7.104 Nutra Pharma Corp. OTC- BULLETIN BOARD SYMBOL NPHC Corporate Headquarters: 485 Martin Lane Beverly Hills, California 90210 (310) 276-8767 800-715-9999 (IR) info@nutrapharma.com The Ones Responsible Officers and Directors and Significant Players Michael Flax Zirk Engelbrecht Kenneth Eade (with a little help from their friends) SEC FILINGS Some Basic Facts - as of the June 30, 2003 10Q l Statement Shares outstanding (common) - 45,634,500 Total Assets April 30, 2003 - $819,327 see report and complaint Total Liabilities - $106,222 Revenues for 6 months ending 6/30/03- $0 Total Net Loss for 6 months ended 6/30/03 - $103,822 Accumulated Deficit - $379,377 Stock price when published $.80 Market capitalization $36,507,600 Date Filed: September 24, 2003 Filed with: SEC Enforcement Division Known actions to date - None our-street.com files complaint with SEC against NPHC.OB OUR COMPLAINT SUMMARY BELOW IS A SUMMARY REPORT. TO READ THE ACTUAL COMPLAINT CLICK ON IT. Nutra Pharma is a company of questionable intent and direction run by people with highly suspect agendas. It is also a company that has, in our opinion, crossed the regulatory line in several instances and we are filing a complaint with the SEC as a result. Before we look at how it got to where it is today and see if we can figure out who got rich in the process, we need to meet the characters and understand the connections. It would be a lot easier if they printed a program, but we will try to put it all together for you here. The designated attorney for this posse's activities is one Kenneth Eade from Santa Barbara, CA. Not only has he been disciplined by the California State Bar Association a few times, he also seems to have a problem paying his child support. Nice guy! members.calbar.ca.gov Ken has been involved in several deals I am sure you will recognize if you have been around suspect deals long. American Ammunition and ComputerXpress.com are two you might recognize. In addition to acting as the company's attorney, Ken likes to take shares in the company, and still feels comfortable rendering an opinion on the tradability of stock, perhaps even his own. Frankly we are not comfortable with this disclosed or otherwise. Ken's family likes to participate with deals Ken is involved in as well. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Ken likes to use his wife's family in his deals. It seems his mother-in-law, Nina Gotova and other members of the Gotova clan are frequently huge shareholders in these deals but there is little disclosure as to exactly what they did to get the shares. In this case, the roll of Kenneth and Nina will be played without credits by the Virgin Island Corporation, Modern Health Care Associates. Kenneth Eade owns or controls Modern Health Care Holdings so, in every respect, this is a related party transaction and should have been disclosed. Being an attorney, Ken knows better but being that our opinion is that he is a dishonest lawyer, I guess he just doesn't care. Ken is so deep in this deal, this alone makes this deal very very dirty. Not disclosing here is a VERY BAD THING! Speaking of the Gotova family, if you want to meet Nutra Pharma's twin sister, please by all means visit the initial registration on American Ammunition. You will see almost the exact same structure but with a couple of different Gotova's holding the initial shares instead of our temp President like was used here. AAMI REGISTRATION DOCS (By way of coincidence, AAMI used the same fax-spamming company that helped get Aqua Vie Beverage shares get suspended by the SEC and tossed off the Bulletin Board. Small world indeed isn't it?) Alright, how many of you think that Kenneth's mother in law is really the brains behind this posse? ..... How many of you think she probably is a "straw man" for Ken? Good... that is our opinion too since he has a general power of attorney from the company! Now, Ken has an assistant named Jeffery Volpe. Jeffery was in Nutra Pharma from the outset as the Secretary for which he picked up a block of stock. He was in essence something akin to the posse's placeholder until the original President and major shareholder could be moved out and replaced with one of Ken's posse, Robert Yarbray. Robert is a regular player with Ken and has participated in many a deal with him including ComputerXpress.com (now in its third or fourth resurrection) VNTB. Of course in this one Robert and Ken also teamed up with another great guy Allan Wolfson. Wait, did I say Allan Wolfson? Yep.. that's the one. (check both links.. they are different). Ken sure has some terrific friends. (did I hear someone say something about birds of a feather?) Speaking of Jeffery, did we mention Jeffery has a sister Nancy Volpe? Well he does and Nancy is another member of the posse. She also provides the connection to the rest of the posse and to the east coast. As far as we can determine, Jeff and Nancy are the "Mongo's" of this group. Nancy appears to have replaced her brother as Secretary for Nutra Pharma and also worked with Ken and some of the Gotova's on another deal, E Synergies, ESYG along with another member of the posse, her boss, Marcy Engelbrecht. Are you keeping up with this? I hope so because we really are getting to a good part. Marcy Engelbrecht is an attorney and also is a HUGE shareholder in Nutra Pharma through Opus International, LLC. She picked up another 12.9 million shares, the same as Eade with his mother-in-law. But, of course, like with Ken Eade and Nina Govota, Marcy's husband Zirk Engelbrecht (Nutra Pharma's Chairman of the Board, President, CFO or what-have-you depending on which merger they are claiming to be doing at the time) has more than a little bit to say about how Opus treats these shares in our opinion. And once again, there is no disclosure regarding the relationship which once again is a VERY BAD THING! Of course, with Zirk Enbelbrecht, you would naturally expect bad things. You see, Zirk has a bit more history than anyone else in this deal (since Allan Wolfson isn't a part of the Nutra Pharma deal). In the early Zirk has been called "one of South Africa's most notorious peddlers of dubious unlisted share schemes" Of course, it is hard to say where exactly that rates Zirk when it comes to the likes of some of the scam artists that frequent the Bulletin Boards but, still it is quite a distinction. ZIRK 1 ZIRK 2 It seems as if Zirk was running his con in South Africa in a big way before coming to America to work the Bulletin Boards. Now we come to the final official member of the posse and that appears to be the most unlikely one of all, Dr. Michael Flax our "respected" dentist. Gasp, is it possible that a guy with a resume that looks so inviting could be a part of this group? Well, we do have one big block of stock left over belonging to First International Bank & Trust, a Dominican bank that had its license revoked by the government in May 2002, so let's see what ol' Doc Flax has been up to. If you read the Doc's resume you will see he is a director in something called Healthstar Corp. It did trade under the OTC BB symbol of PPOS. In June 2000, here are some of the board members and officers. Edward M. Chism............. 60 Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer Isidor Buholzer, Jr......... 39 Director Dr. Michael D. Flax......... 44 Director Then in July 2001 a changing of the guard and look who took Mike's and Isador's place. Edward M. Chism 61 Chairman of the Board Zirk Engelbrecht 44 President, Chief Executive Officer and Director Another interesting fact to note is that Healthstar Corp. had an address of 2875 N.E. 191ST STREET, SUITE 601 AVENTURA, FLORIDA. And of course, Marcy and Zirk's E synergie was a part of the deal that brought Zirk into Healthstar. It's interesting how they keep working together isn't it. But some of these names seem quite familiar as does that address. Could it be that Ol' Doc Flax has opened up an even more interesting can of worms? Indeed he has! It seems as if our good Doctor has been hanging out with some very bad men himself. Edward Chism is a man with trouble-a-plenty right now. SEC Files Motion To Amend Complaint To Add Edward M. Chism, Sr. As Additional Defendant In Action Against American Financial Group Of Aventura, Inc. And David H. Siegel, In Connection With An $87 Million Securities Fraud Scheme I say, bit of a sticky wicket if you ask me. Now we could call this coincidental but let's not jump to that conclusion quite yet. Remember the address of Healthstar Corp? Let's check Florida Corporate records and see where American Financial Group of Aventura was headquartered shall we? Well what do you know, 2875 N.E. 191st St., Suite 601 again. A real den of thieves if you ask me. Could it be that Michael was up to his crown moldings with these financial thugs? We say yes. You see, Michael is a principal in another private corporation with almost the same name as his public company. This one is called Healthstar of Aventura, Inc. and who do you suppose is also a principal of that corporation? Why it's our old friends Edward Chism, Isador Buholzer and a newcomer Luis Queral. And that same Aventura address again too. How convenient. Just so you can keep the players straight, Isador Buholzer also worked with American Financial Group and Edward Chism and David Siegal. Now I have a question for you. Why would a dentist like Flax start a private corporation with almost the exact name as a public company with many of the same people; one that was connected to offshore financial resources? Can anyone give us one rational business strategy to explain this activity that has ethical and legal intent? We cannot think of one and would appreciate it if someone could help in this regard by suggesting some rational and ethical explanation for this. So now we know, this innocent looking dentist, Michael Flax is running pretty tightly with a pretty scary group of guys. Flax just has a different disguise on than say Eade who dresses up like a respectable attorney. Still it is our opinion that Flax has introduced another level of players to the Nutra Pharma table and we further believe that his stake in this game, perhaps along with his personal posse, is First International Bank & Trust's 12.9 Million shares. When you check the records you will see that as soon as the FIBT got its block of stock one of the first things it did was vest a cool 3,000,000 shares to the Doc without the proper disclosure once again. Ok, there is the line up of players. Pretty scary don't you agree? Now let's look at the game they are playing. We don't know exactly whose game plan this is but it is a pretty simple one. Step one, take over control of the company. That was accomplished before the company had even finished its registration process. Step two, find something to acquire. In a rather unique twist, in this case they issued the fellow who brought the "company" (Nutra Pharma, a private corporation) to the table, 4.5 million shares and at the same time, issued about 39,000,000 shares to the people who were responsible for executing the business plan. We have seen a lot of shell mergers but this is the first one we saw where the deal guys got the 90%. Of course those shares were divided among Eade through Modern Health Care Associates and his mothe- in-law Nina Govota, the Engelbrecht's through Opus International and, we believe, Flax et al through First International Bank & Trust. Step three, promote the stock and begin liquidation of insider shares. Step four, announce another acquisition, (Bio Therapeutics) through a series of press releases. Claim the acquisition is completed, even though it isn't. Step five, continue to promote and liquidate shares. Step six, announce yet another agreement to acquire yet another company but only disclose in your SEC filings that the first acquisition was unwound and the second acquisition agreement was rescinded without completing the remaining contingencies. Step seven, throughout the period take the 38,840,000 shares you split among the "three amigos" and either sell them or move then into undisclosed hands so you can liquidate without the market or the SEC noticing. Make sure not to file the required documents with the SEC disclosing your interest in the stock or the fact you were moving the shares out of sight. Continue to pump and liquidate by only issuing press releases about the acquisitions and never mentioning the fact that both previous acquisitions either unwound or were rescinded. Of course, use buzzwords like "bioterrorism" and "immediate revenues from commercializing remediation technology" to encourage buying even though there is almost no basis for the use of these phrases. PS: WE HAVE CHECKED AND CAN FIND NO LISTED BIOTERRORISM PATHOGEN LISTED BY THE CDC THAT IS ALSO ON INFECTECH'S LIST OF BACTERIA ITS TECHNOLOGY APPLIES TO. CHECK IT OUT! IN OUR OPINION, UNLESS SOMEONE SHOWS US PROOF WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIND THIS WHOLE CLAIM OF BIOTERRORISM IS A SCAM! This plan completely ignores one particular aspect of the Section 10b-5 of the Exchange Act. It goes like this It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange, To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud, To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security. Simply put we think this means if you are going to be promoting the fact that you are acquiring a company, you have to also include the fact you didn't close or unwound previously announced acquisitions. You announce you acquired one, you better tell everyone if it goes sour. REGARDLESS, TO SAY AN ACQUISITION CLOSED WHEN IT DIDN'T IS FRAUD!!! So, on one hand we have a group of people who are professionals at this shell merger business and some who already have a notorious past and others who have been hanging around with some pretty nefarious characters under highly questionable circumstances all collaborating together without the proper disclosure and disclaimers and this posse is running a program that fails in the areas of disclosure and stinks every where else. What do they say? If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck............ Finally, we have one other concern which we would like answered. We assume that the combination of Eade, Engelbrecht and Flax are no dummies but it seems as if these non mergers got an awful lot of cash from them. This seems somehow out of character. What with all their offshore connections and what with the Doc Flax and Chism creating these private corporations with mirror names, we cannot help but ask, what really happened to all that cash? We see, that in the latest financial statement, somehow, the Engelbrecht family are picking up 10,300,000 shares for money advanced but somehow the same figure seems to still be on the books as a "related party loan receivable" to the company. What is that about? And why are they getting the stock at about half the market value at the time? I doubt we have the ability to get to the bottom of this cash question. I suppose it would take someone with a lot more man power and subpoena power to ferret that one out. Hmmmm. As always, we will gladly provide a space for any documented and verifiable comments by the company and will promptly and sincerely apologize for any errors in our facts. Our commitment is to bring forth the truth and the facts in the matter and we encourage Nutra Pharma to produce whatever documents they can to clear up our concerns and the concerns of what we assume are many Nutra Pharma's shareholders. Questions about our use of Copyrighted material on our site? Click here!

Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: Bill from Wisconsin	3/29/2012 7:04:45 AM
	of 11756

MMRF From: Robert H. Lorsch [mailto:rhl@rhlgroup.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 2:44 PM To: xxxxxx Subject: To all 300 members of the Operation Mole Task Force We have just found Mr_Sano he email is above. If any of you feel you have been injured by this person and would like to participate in the lawsuit against him let us know. His name is Mark xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Ca. Website is xxxxx and I hope he enjoys the press he is about to get. Please make sure he you make this go viral so Mr Sano can no longer hide under a rock and gets the press he deserves on every place you can post it. Robert H. "Bob" Lorsch, CEO, MMRGlobal 4401 Wilshire Blvd., 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90010, Tel. 310-476-7002, Fax 206-374-6136 www.mmrglobal.com www.mymedicalrecords.com Follow me on Twitter at BobLorschTweets CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This Email contains confidential and privileged information intended only for the individual(s) or entity to which it is sent. If you are not the intended recipient, or responsible for delivery of Email to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this information is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this Email in error, please notify the sender by reply email or telephone.

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

To: Bill from Wisconsin who wrote (11602)	3/29/2012 9:00:34 AM
From: scion	of 11756

Is this the same Lorsch? - Robert Lorsch caption more. E.g., Tr. 2190-2195. A task force was created in response to a motion of the ... Lorsch announced the WWS's institution of “Operation Mole.” www.dm.usda.gov/oaljdecisions/080804_AWA_03-0034D.pdf Extract - In re: ) AWA Docket No. 03-0034 ) MARTINE COLETTE, an individual; ) WILDLIFE WAYSTATION, a California ) corporation; and ROBERT H. LORSCH, an ) individual One of Respondent Lorsch’s columns was referenced a number of times in this proceeding. In his “best friend” letter in the spring 2003 Wildlife Waystation Magazine Lorsch announced the WWS’s institution of “Operation Mole.” CX 19, pp. 2-3. Lorsch testified that he was concerned that several present and former WWS employees and volunteers were spreading unfounded stories to a variety of government officials and were slandering the WWS, even though non-disclosure agreements were signed by employees and volunteers. Believing that people who discover problems and go to authorities instead of management are “in the gutter,” Tr. 3180, and reacting to what he believed were threats and harassment, he announced in his letter that “ a Waystation ‘best friend’” would provide a $100 reward or a $250 charitable organization for anyone who could identify those who were providing “regulators” “inaccurate information” with the award to be doubled if the individual identified was a current volunteer or employee of the WWS. Apparently there were no takers for this program. Testimony was overwhelming that Lorsch did not have a role in the day to day operations of the WWS. (e.g., Tr. 2240-2250, 3821-3873). While the figurative altitude varied, Lorsch was described, by himself and others, as someone who operates at 50,000 feet, rather than at ground level, as a “big picture” person, rather than someone who is concerned with details. Tr. 3896-3897. It is clear that he knew very little, if anything, about how to care for animals, what type of staff was necessary to properly operate the facility, how the cages should be constructed, etc. It is clear that he did not know much about the animals at the facility, only that he wanted to help the WWS work out its differences with the USDA, the State of California, the County of Los Angeles and any other government entities that the WWS was dealing with. www.dm.usda.gov/oaljdecisions/080804_AWA_03-0034D.pdf

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

To: Bill from Wisconsin who wrote ()	3/29/2012 11:30:40 AM
From: scion	of 11756

Civil Party Search Thu Mar 29 11:26:57 2012 37 records found Search: Civil Party Search Name Lorsch, Robert H All Courts Page: 1 Party Name Court Case NOS Date Filed Date Closed 1 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) cacdce 2:1998-cv-06552 850 08/11/1998 11/04/1998 Marc Ostrofsky, et al v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 2 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) cacdce 2:1998-cv-06628 850 08/13/1998 09/01/1999 Gerald Tobin v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 3 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) cacdce 2:1998-cv-06681 850 08/14/1998 03/10/1999 Patricia Bartolomeo v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 4 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) cacdce 2:1998-cv-06682 850 08/14/1998 03/10/1999 David Jaroslawicz v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 5 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) cacdce 2:1998-cv-06797 850 08/19/1998 03/10/1999 Alison Mizraji v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 6 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) cacdce 2:1998-cv-07437 850 09/14/1998 03/10/1999 David Turf v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 7 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) cacdce 2:1998-cv-07613 850 09/21/1998 11/04/1998 Charles R. Ostroff v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 8 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) cacdce 2:1999-cv-03747 850 04/07/1999 09/02/1999 Concetta Bruno, et al v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 9 Lorsch, Robert H (pla) cacdce 2:2003-cv-03612 110 05/21/2003 06/11/2004 Robert H Lorsch, et al v. CNA Financial Corp, et al 10 Lorsch, Robert H (pla) cacdce 2:2004-cv-02992 890 04/28/2004 06/24/2004 Robert H Lorsch v. Ann M Veneman et al 11 Lorsch, Robert H (pla) cacdce 2:2006-cv-04515 890 07/19/2006 10/26/2006 Robert H Lorsch v. Salomon Smith Barney et al 12 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:2000-cv-00307 850 03/14/2000 05/10/2001 5S Trust I, et al v. Lorsch, et al 13 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:2000-md-01315 850 12/13/1999 05/22/2007 In Re: Eckstein, et al v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 14 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00814 850 08/12/1998 05/10/2001 Eckstein, et al v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 15 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00815 850 08/12/1998 05/10/2001 Mitsui Intnl Company v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 16 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00816 850 08/12/1998 05/10/2001 Andres v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 17 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00817 850 08/12/1998 05/10/2001 Meshel v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 18 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00820 850 08/12/1998 05/10/2001 Weil v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 19 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00833 850 08/18/1998 05/10/2001 Watson v. Lorsch, et al 20 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00846 850 08/21/1998 05/10/2001 Bernard, et al v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 21 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00907 850 09/11/1998 05/10/2001 Stone Setters Annuit, et al v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 22 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00948 850 09/21/1998 05/10/2001 Baptista v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 23 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-00998 850 09/29/1998 05/10/2001 Anderson v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 24 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01009 850 10/01/1998 11/25/1998 Coven v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 25 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01160 850 11/18/1998 05/10/2001 Ostrofsky, et al v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 26 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01161 850 11/18/1998 05/10/2001 Mizraji v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 27 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01162 850 11/18/1998 05/10/2001 Ostroff v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 28 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01163 850 11/18/1998 05/10/2001 Turf v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 29 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01164 850 11/18/1998 05/10/2001 Jaroslawicz v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 30 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01165 850 11/18/1998 05/10/2001 Bartolomeo v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 31 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01166 850 11/18/1998 05/10/2001 Tobin v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al 32 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1998-cv-01249 370 12/11/1998 07/27/1999 Ernst, et al v. Smartalk, et al 33 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1999-cv-00037 850 01/15/1999 03/20/2002 Gurary v. SmarTalk Teleservice, et al 34 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:1999-cv-00127 850 02/04/1999 08/26/1999 Jacobson v. Lorsch, et al 35 Lorsch, Robert H (dft) ohsdce 2:2005-cv-00401 110 04/21/2005 03/12/2008 Genesis Insurance Company v. Alfi et al 36 Lorsch, Robert H. (dft) madce 1:1999-cv-11499 850 07/14/1999 03/09/2000 5S Trust I, et al v. Lorsch, et al 37 Lorsch, Robert H. (dft) nyedce 1:1998-cv-05163 850 08/11/1998 09/28/1998 Coven v. Smartalk Teleservice, et al pcl.uscourts.gov

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

To: scion who wrote (11604)	3/29/2012 11:34:11 AM
From: scion	of 11756

Bankruptcy Party Search Thu Mar 29 11:32:26 2012 4 records found Search: Bankruptcy Party Search Name Lorsch, Robert H All Courts Page: 1 Party Name Court Case Ch Date Filed Date Closed Disposition 1 Lorsch, Robert H (pla) cacbke 2:04-ap-01999 06/14/2004 03/26/2007 Dismissed for Want of Prosecution 05/03/2006 Lorsch and Tonken 2 Lorsch, Robert H (pla) cacbke 2:04-ap-02000 06/14/2004 03/27/2007 Dismissed for Want of Prosecution 05/03/2006 Lorsch and Tonken 3 LORSCH, ROBERT H. (cr) debke 1:99-bk-00108 11 01/19/1999 05/18/2011 Discharge Not Applicable WORLDWIDE DIRECT, INC. 4 LORSCH, ROBERT H. (dft) debke 1:00-ap-00691 07/03/2000 OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS and LORSCH pcl.uscourts.gov

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

From: StockDung	3/30/2012 3:50:51 PM
	of 11756

Intertainment sues Stockhouse poster "Nub92" 2012-03-30 14:31 ET - Street Wire by Mike Caswell Intertainment Media Inc. has filed a defamation case against Stockhouse poster "Nub92" over on-line statements about the company. The suit, filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia on Tuesday, March 27, complains about a post that accused the company of owning no patents for its Ortsbo product and of using investors "as atm." The company seeks a permanent injunction barring future defamatory postings, as well as damages for libel. The suit comes just two weeks after Intertainment launched a similar case against three other posters, "MaydayMalone," "f3drivr" and "CESpumper." The company complained about posts that called it a "pure scam" and referred to its management as criminals. Intertainment has not yet identified those three posters, and they have not responded to the case. The current suit is contained in a notice of claim that Intertainment filed at the Vancouver courthouse against a John Doe who posts under the user name "Nub92." On March 13, 2012, he wrote a message in broken English that stated: "Ortsobo owns no patents... Ortsobo built of google translater... Ortsobo use investor as atm... Ortsobo use classic celebrity pumpin... Ortsobo BLANTANTLY manipulate user numbers with 3rd party... Ortsobo ponzi BUT ITS VANCOUVER SO ILL JUST HAVE FUN SHORTING THIS INTO OBLIVION HA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH." Intertainment complains that the post would be understood by readers to mean that management had defrauded investors and had falsified user numbers for Ortsbo. Readers would also have understood that the Ortsbo product (which the company touts as a translator) is identical to or built on Google's translation platform. According to the claim many people have viewed the post, as the Intertainment forum typically receives more readers in a day than all other Stockhouse forums. In the seven days prior to the post there were 2,358 messages posted in the Intertainment forum, with 483,627 "reads." The readers would have included residents of B.C. The suit seeks damages for libel, a permanent injunction, punitive damages, interest and court costs. Vancouver lawyer Brent MacLean of Davis LLP filed the case on the company's behalf. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reader Comments - Comments are open to paying subscribers of Stockwatch and unmoderated, although libelous remarks, obscene language and impersonations may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Stockwatch. For information regarding Canadian libel law, please view the University of Ottawa's FAQ regarding Defamation and SLAPPs.

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

Previous 10 | Next 10

Copyright/IP Policy

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