Different Names

Where I came from those who hold life time position regardless of what they do are called dictators. Apparently those are known as federal judges here.

The Chief Judge

And do not forget about the chief judge of that appellate court whom the actions of his clerk do not keep confidence that the chief judge of that court minds that in his court there were orders lacking stating who issued them or  the wide range of overstepping authority with which the clerk of his court issues orders.

Beyond simply abusing authority

 Also, take into account that the outrageous behavior of those judges was more than simply abusing their powers and authorities because of a conviction or even overly inflated ego. No, it was more than that clearly part of a conspiracy with the hedge fund guy. A significant  part of those actions was ,in fact,  intentionally intended to show outrageousness and big diversion from the normal path in order to weaken my will by showing me how much power the hedge fund guy has inside these courts.

A Joke System

I cant put this any other way. A government system with what happened from the courts here and even the mail man makes that special exception  to be in obedience to the like of this hedge fund guy disregarding the rules of the  law and their duties to this level publicly, is a joke system no matter where it is.

Filling the dictator’s place

Corruption here took the place of the dictator in a dictatorship.  But unlike the situation in a dictatorship, corruption here is not seen as a thing that is superimposed on  life and accepted as a normal part of it.


The level of disregard to the system

 You would think that if one has the power to pull what has been pulled here making federal judges (both district and circuit) act at this level of corruption he would save that for a more compelling  situation. After all, we are not contesting the ownership of Microsoft  nor there is a criminal prosecution here. But shows even more how corrupt is the system here that it is ready to being  abused and service even the non serious whims of the like of this hedge fund guy.

Before and After

Honestly, how many would have accepted from me even the mere suggestion that ,for example, the federal district court may do such a thing as sending me an order taking away part of the remaining time allowed to all plaintiffs to serve their complaints for no reason? It was not even based  on a requesting motion but a sua sponte order the court ,technically, made on its own. A listener hearing such suggestion from me could have said:

– You are not living in this real world but in a far suspicious delusional one of your own creation.


From paranoid suspicions to boring reality

I think I showed enough signs related to corruption even in the court system that it is now seen as familiar reality by those who would have otherwise thrown their paranoia accusations disregarding and walking away from allowing such thoughts or suspicions. Nevertheless such reactions were far from being balanced or anywhere of being balanced by their reactions toward the opposite side when clear signs and evidences were presented to them as if they already knew that and accept living in it.
I think I showed enough of what was generally taken like ghost claims here to make others bored instead of being shocked or surprised for seeing any more ghosts rather than ordinary persons.

Brief Answers And Their Reply

On the 12 of this month the Appellee/Defendant who was given close to five times its FRAP time to file its answer brief ,filed that brief.Here is what took all that time to be produced:
Appellee/Defendant Action Stock Transfer Corporation Answer Brief
Here is also the Answer Brief of the Appellee/Defendant who had filed one earlier.
Appellee/Defendant Dror Svorai Answer Brief
Here is a link to the Appellees affidavit referred to in that answer
and its the Appellant reply
Appellee Dror Svorai Affidavit (doc 34)

Here is my reply brief for both answers filed within the FRAP 14 days without any extension (like my initial brief before it):
Appellant Reply Brief
Here is also the my initial brief:

Appellant Initial Brief
Here is also a link to the original complaint:

Current process serving rules not enough

If it were me I would also require a defendant in a case to be given a full body massage for the service of process to be correct. Why not? It is not like the current rules are needed for justice and fairness to defendants. The main thing needed is for the defendant to know that there is a complaint against him in the court. Anything other than that is much less needed if at all. That is because  no matter how you make it difficult to serve a complaint it would not correct being sued for unjust cause. Even if you think about how just it would be in situations were the defendant himself needs to seek the details of the complaint instead of being directly provided to him it would be either a fair thing for sufficiently fair claim or a minor thing added to and compared with being sued unfairly and required to respond to that. So what is all this complication for?
Anyway, imagine how fun it would be when courts try to rule on  claims from lawyers that there defendants received only partial  massages and therefore the service of process was invalid (Although, seriously, it could still be less ridiculous, and childish, than much of the current chasing and hiding game).
But don’t worry. My system may still consider a sponge bath to be in “substantial” compliance with the rule and accept such service (Of course, after wasting judiciary time that could have served some really needed thing other than finding a way around a complication I myself created for no reason).


Appellate Court Order directly violates a local rule

 In addition to all the reasons I mentioned about how outrageous was granting the motion to postpone the due date of the defendant’s brief until ruling on the frivolous dismissal motion in posts like this
http://ontcposts.blogspot.com/2013/12/layer-under-layer-of-outrageousness.html it turned out that there is also local court rule regarding such request which that order directly violated . The 11th Cir. R. 31-1 (c) Rule titled “Effect of Other Pending Motions on Time for Serving and Filing Brief” clearly states that “Except as otherwise provided in this rule, a pending motion does not postpone the time for serving and filing any brief.”
The exceptions mentioned were two related to criminal appeals and replacement briefs. Neither one of those two exceptions apply here.

Even if the constitution does not allow what I said there amending it for that purpose is something that I can not see a reason for anyone to oppose. It would give better opportunity for everybody to be heard while at the same time the supreme court will remain the final decider that can be sought by whoever wants that.There is no reason to make prioritizing cases sacrifices the rights of some to contest injustice they suffer like a dictatorship when you have the choice to do otherwise.

 What sinking path congress would like to choose?

I wonder what kind of moral sinking to the bottom congress would like to claim for itself for not impeaching those judges here?
That they do not care because it happened to me and they discriminate? Or that they are not discriminating and this is how they accept for the judiciary to operate?
I find it a low probability that the clerk of that appellate court did what he did not counting on support from the chief judge of that court and expecting that judge to be opposed to his actions.
Similar to how there were efforts put in the constitution to protect against being abused by the government , our time requires safeguards from being abused by the big power of corruption we live with.


Look from how far the defense starts

 I have noticed this from the beginning but waited to feel more confident about what I am saying. It seems that every time I bring more strongly to attention things that shows the power and control some corrupt financial institutions have in this country some other issue or scandal gets brought  to attention in order to distract from that issue and probably even to fight back the legislators themselves by damaging their reputations.
I talked about the corruption of the SEC toward hedge funds and a scandal gets raised about the IRS. I sent some senators the initial games this hedge fund guy made the district court play on me and the story of Edward Snowden started. It felt from the beginning as if someone was telling legislators : just in case you want to open a door on us, here is what we can open on you. And now we have issue of the CIA and the Senate appears to be also brought to attention intentionally at this time. The intention could be to prevent legislators from even turning their heads toward the direction of the problem I mentioned at the beginning.
I have never being able to bring myself to believe with any substantial probability that Edward Snowden was not pushed from here to do what he did whether he realize that or not. Furthermore, I don’t see what sufficiently answer what seems to me a good probability that at least some of those IRS officials who admitted the problem and/or pled the fifth amendment did that to support creating the  scandal in support of that entity trying to distract the attention rather than defending themselves against it.
Speaking about the supreme court, how is it possible to see that it can have enough time to handle all cases in this huge country as if it is still at its constitution time size? How much does that court refuse to take cases that otherwise it would have taken if it has the time?
Clearly the more courts cases pass through before reaching the supreme court the better the chance that errors will be corrected along that path and as a result the supreme court can have the time to handle more cases that need to be taken. That is why I think that those who made the constitution did put in it a preparation for that with the right given to congress to establish as many courts as needed. I think that not only the supreme court but all those courts can have  jurisdiction over cases appealed from state supreme courts. I think that this interpretation is also supported by the only condition put on these courts which is of being inferior to the supreme court. The support that later thing gives to this interpretation comes from the combined power of leaving open other jurisdictional possibilities in addition to how being inferior to the supreme court suggests sharing a jurisdiction.
 In any case, just like how I brought my complaint here after encapsulating with it the questions of corruption at the district court I can reencapsulate  the questions of corruption at the appellate court and take it to the supreme court. I also know that I can or could have filed a writ of mandamus to make this court do its job in a reasonable way but I preferred to keep things until I appeal the final decisions here to that remaining court.


The three judges who ruled on the motion

Are those three judges who ruled on the frivolous motion to dismiss the same three who will rule on my complaint? Was it that since Saddam is not available they picked the next (best) choice to rule on me? One of those judges already showed big potential for unfair handling of the case and inclination toward the defendant’s side with the motion he approved. Another one broke the scale of outrageousness with a motion she approved for that same side.

The third judge did not show something specific toward my case. Nevertheless, before seeing his name here I read a little about the judges of that court and it came to my attention that that judge did not assume the senior status which qualify for same pay with less cases to handle despite being eligible for it for a very long time. I thought that someone working to serve the big and corrupted entities may make that choice in order to increase the chance of serving them and here I see the name of that judge in case related to this hedge fund guy where he is pulling strings left and right.

In addition, the two male judges share with the judge of the district court the military service path and that is not like any other common thing in making individuals act as a group.

Limited Openings

Again, anyone would like to issue orders in my case with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals? Why just the clerk? That is not fair. And don’t worry, you don’t even have to think. A coin toss would still be an improvement over the level of fairness with which the real judges of that court has been handling my case. Don’t delay, only limited openings are available.
By the way, notice that despite my suspicions I ,at least most of the time, used to point to the “clerk office” when speaking about related games and resisted pointing to the clerk personally until these actions pointed to direct responsibility by him.


Cartoon court or Federal Appellate Court

 Even a cartoon court I can think of where Bugs Bunny moves fast to take the place of all parties arguing with himself could still be better positioned to deal honestly with my case than this appellate court with the level of sinking it allowed itself to reach in serves of this hedge fund guy.
So, based on the action of the clerk of this court, if while you are walking one day you felt like issuing orders like a judge without being a judge then this is your court. Who knows? May be someone will accidentally wonder into this court tomorrow and issue orders related to my case.
The posts I made yesterday were about only part of the new story. What is the other part about? The other part is where the second punch line after that of the 30 days extension. The defendant came again to request another extension. And today I found that he was again granted a new extension by the clerk of the court until 3/12/2014.
You think you reached the final punch line here? Not yet. The clerk also issued a “public communication” on his own and in which he declared that the briefs of all appellees are due on 3/12/2014.
Aside from how ridiculous the situation orders by judges of that court allowed it to be, even on direct technical view on its face the clerk has no authority to do that. He has the authority to grant extensions (of up to seven days) but not the authority to give a new permission to file for those who had already missed the dead line. Even for the defendant who requested this later extension the clerk has no authority to give this seven days “extension” because it was not shown that the 30 days instead of 14 days previous extension was an order that came from a judge. Even if you add 7 days to the 14 days there would still be an interruption and therefore an extension cannot be granted by the clerk of the court.
Docket Sheet on 3/6/2014
 Actually, even the seven days extension clerk authority is only for the first time request. Aside from the good reason requirement, for a second time extension request, the clerk do not have the authority to issue any extension of time. Only the court can do that and a motion is required. This was stated clearly in 11th Cir. R. 31-2 (C) stating that “A second request must be made by written motion and will only be acted upon by the court” http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/documents/pdfs/RulesDEC13.pdf and this was not even the second request for time extension]

Confusing responsibilities played again by the 11th Appellate Court

Notice that a game similar to the one I talked about here
in its aim of confusing who is responsible for the action was also played by this federal Appeal Court in its order talked about in the preceding post . If you compare the orders in the two order links in that post you would see that unlike the older one the newer order has the thirty days extension mentioned at the first page but not with the main content of the order. It started by stating that  “The enclosed order has been ENTERED”  then stated that “Appellee’s brief is due 30 days from the date of the enclosed order” which was not included in the “enclosed order”. So which judge made the ruling of 30 days instead of the 14 days limit granted by the order granting the second time extension motion? Or was it the clerk of the court not only exceeding the limits of his authority but also contradicting an order issued by a judge in the court?
Again, what kind of court plays low games like these?
After that one of a kind court order from that 11th Circus Court of Appeal which granted the defendant a variable length second time extension of 14 additional days after they rule on a dismissal motion that itself was at the top of frivolousness scale, on 2/2/2014 there came another order related to the matter. The docket sheet mentioned that the order was denying that frivolous dismissal motion. So, I thought that the intention was to subdue the effect of that outrageous second time extension order and did not think there was a reason for me to read it. That was until yesterday when I discovered I was wrong in expecting it to be corruption free. The court gave 30 days instead of 14 extension from after this ruling on the motion for no reason. Although the second time extension motion itself asked for 14 days after ruling on the dismissal motion and the wonderful order granting it stated that the defendants brief is due after 14 days from ruling on the obviously frivolous motion, the court in this order apparently wanted to make a charitable donation of additional 16 days in contradiction with the order granting the defendant’s time extension request.

The order denying the dismissal motion

In addition, why would the court be concerned about the other issue of when the defendant will file its brief to begin with when it is in the process of ruling on an entirely different motion with an entirely different issue , not to mention another issue that has been already ruled on?

SEC regulations facilitate hiding of hedge fund violations and manipulations

 As if being taken over by hedge funds is not enough protection in itself, some regulations the SEC makes also allow hiding hedge funds activities and give better excuse in not discovering what, where and how they violate other laws and regulations and manipulate stocks in comparison with individual investors.  I spoke about this in a previous post. Based on my understanding the SEC requires ordinary people to file with it any ownership of more than 5 percent (Schedule 13D or equivalent) of any stock within 10 days of obtaining that ownership. If you are a hedge fund ,on the other hand, this requirement does not apply to you. Instead you can get in and out obtaining less than 10 percent ownership of all the stocks you want and you only would have to file if your ownership of that stock at the last  day of the year is above 5 percent.
Living here and believing  the  SEC  is a real valid functioning entity for what it was created for, is like living in Russia and really believing you have a democratic system.
Even for general basic needs, there is no refuge from the corruption I see here. The hedge fund guy watches everything I do on my computers and has viruses messing things up for me and causing malfunctions. Basic functionalities on my Google’s blogs are not all available to me and may not apply despite being selected.
But most importantly is that I have my password settings requiring two step verifications through password in addition to a phone call giving a random number required for logging in and I still get messages from Google that I was logged out from other locations.
I changed the phone to which these numbers are sent from voice calls to my landline through my Internet phone with Phone Power to a text message to my cell phone with Virgin Mobile and still this thing continues to happen. In both cases or at least in the case of my cell phone, I can show that I did not receive the phone call required to log in, a text message in case of the cell phone,  which clearly indicate a foul play by someone.

Remember, this is not even about privacy. That ship had already sailed, as they say, and nobody seems to mind. The hedge fund guy and his gang see everything I type , visit or search for on my computers and seems to have the support of a professional group that can create viruses that cannot be avoided (Nevertheless he is still a joke when trying to connect things around me and put theories far from how I do that with him without any access to same things on his side) .No, this is about the minimum of keeping what is required to exist as secret in order to protect what is a basic general need that is being made unavailable to me.

SEC regulations encouraging naked shorting

In fact, even the regulations themselves that were established by the SEC seem to encourage naked shorting and you know who benefit the most from these maneuvering paths (Hint: Not the individual investor). They don’t make it clear that no shorting is allowed by a market maker or whoever unless shares first borrowed and not just expected to be borrowed. They justify giving such potential to manipulate the market with improving the liquidity in the market. Allowing the selling of nothing as existing shares  and reducing the value of shares owned by shareholders in order to offer better liquidity to them? What kind of excuse is that?  But again you know who benefit the most from this power to abuse the market.

Corruption in the market and the market crash of 2000

Does anyone wonder why as a result of stock market crash of 2000 ,unlike what happened during the recent problem with real estates, no big name like Lehman Brothers or Citibank declared bankruptcy or became under substantial financial trouble? In fact, during the real estate problem it was hard to find any big financial institution that was not affected by it. That is because what happened in the market down of 2000 was probably, like many other things, a game played or allowed to be played only on the ordinary people who invested in the market. The government watched people very unrealistically exaggerating the valuation of tech companies and did not try to advice and put a matching effort to restore sanity to the market? Why? Do you think it has nothing to do with trying to avoid impeding the big guys from devouring that big potential meal ? What could have been the excuse for missing that? Avoiding interfering with the principles of capitalism and free market? What happened to those principles when the government later interfered to save and help the big guys with financial support rather than just advice and wake up calls?

However the main thing for which I am writing this is how the investments of those ordinary people were treated in the market. I used to look at how stocks went down from high prices and think about the over valuation mistakes that led to this loss for many people. But a while after seeing what happened with the Viking system stock story and the naked shorting the corruption of the SEC allows in the market ,aside from other violations and fraudulent activities by some of those hedge funds and financial institutions I wondered how much fairness was left in the market during that time? I started thinking that despite the clearly huge over valuation mistakes ,how could we blame the loss people suffered on those mistakes only? If this is what happens in the ordinary days ,God knows what kind of corruption financial massacres the SEC allowed to happen during that time. A real investigation and looking into the records and books of brokerage and hedge funds of that period may provide even more shocking news about how unfairly people were being slaughtered in the market than that of Madoff’ story. Even the minimum that came in the form of the SHO to combat the problem of naked shorting was not legislated until 2005 so imagine the mess of that time. But who is going to do such investigation? The same points I just mentioned in addition to what we all saw what this one hedge fund guy can pull are all indication showing for the power and control the big corruption forces have in this country.

 Who rules here?

Again, when you see that a USPS mail man chooses to isolate in his deliveries one specific court related package and take it to court at 10:30 in the night you realize the magnitude of the corruption in this country that encourages such audacity.
In choosing between the lawful path and the path sought by the corruption power, the mail man publicly followed the path wanted by the corruption power and went to his work the next day like nothing happened. So who do you think rules here government laws or corruption?
And what about the reaction from the post master general to what I sent him about the incident? Did that sound to anybody like the way someone who really care about the integrity of the USPS work and not part of the corruption would respond? In a non corrupt system it would probably be hard for such a guy to be a neighbor to someone in that position and also probably neither those who chose him to others in the positions they currently assume.
But don’t worry your hedge fund employment history FBI director will be like a wolf after every thing this hedge fund guy here do or causes to happen, right?
You live in a huge joke without realizing it


As if there is a real thing there

After the story of Madoff how is it possible to remain dependent on the SEC as if it is a real entity? What kind of denial is that? And the funny thing is that laws being added to encourage whistle blowers as if there is a thing on which one can count there and you just need to tip them. I can go inside a SEC office shouting in a bullhorn instead of just whistling on the like of this hedge fund guy and nothing would change.
I personally did not need Madoff’s story to know that the SEC is a corrupted entity. I began realizing what the SEC really is starting from 2006 after I sent an email complaining about this same hedge fund guy and my name was revealed to him (In a later case where I sent more complaints, information appeared to reach him that a complaint was sent on him within an hour or two of sending these complaints) . Madoff’s story came to build on what I already knew and helped me answer any doubt I had in that SEC corruption affecting me extends beyond the world of low price stocks in which I work.


What is the SEC? – 2

Lets try first to look and pinpoint more closely to the problem here. Most of the failure to fight back fraud related to the stock market is the result of lack of honesty and integrity in the SEC. It is not the result of lack of sufficient sophistication. This is not a complicated science where you may have a scientist with depth of knowledge irreplaceable by whatever number of others who haven’t yet reached that level of knowledge. Except for things like insider tradings, most of the fraud in the market is even easy to be seen and caught provided that there is a real intention to do that. Take even a major case like that of Madoff’s. Even though I did not dig deep into the details of the case, I still wonder how much more is required beside an honest intention to check to see whether trades , Madoff’s or any other, were real or fake? How would you check fake trades? Using common sense similar to that applied in checking any other claims of buying and selling through tracing the claimed transactions?How could someone with honest intention fail in such a task?The SEC received a tip on Madoff’s fraud and investigated things without finding any problem. Actually there is too much fraud and manipulation in the market that requires nothing more than being seen.
The point is that for much, and probably most, of the fraud and manipulation in the market you do not need specialization beyond common sense intelligence to find it. What you need, instead, is honesty and having a real intention to investigate things. That honesty and integrity would need to be sufficient to stand the strength of the corruption power from those with the financial power and malicious intentions. One way to help achieving that is to make a good use from that fact through expanding the authority of investigating these things as widely as possible so that those with the corruption power would not be able to infiltrate and hijack all that expanded domain or predict who will be investigating them or even how many separate investigations by those various entities with that authority. This is how you fight corruption from the like of those with huge corruption power involved with the stock market rather than the ways of the thirties which probably have became far from being sufficient a long time ago. Your cute and fancy SEC is nothing more than a concentration point for the corruption power of the like of this hedge fund guy.
In addition, this is suitable to be the first level to fighting corruption related to fraud in the market anyway even when a higher degree of sophistication and specialization is required. That is because if you cant deal with things that are clear enough to require only an honest intention to be investigated, how can you trust that sophistication and specialization?


What is the SEC?

The SEC is simply an entity saving the like of this hedge fund guy the from having scattered efforts because of possibilities of being investigated by various entities and instead concentrate his related effort on manipulating one of them from the inside.
I just would like to know what kind of thinking suggests that the best way to combat corruption in the stock market by those with the financial power and connections who control every thing in this country is to assign that task or count on that task to be carried on by a small entity that is easy to be infiltrated and hijacked like the SEC? Instead of that the path to fight corruption in the market should have been implemented through widening such authority and its application to all and every kind of law enforcement entities as much as possible so that those guys with that power cannot concentrate that power on one entity to manipulate. In addition, multiple independent and isolated investigations for the same case enable one of the best possible ways to check for the integrity of these investigations. There is a very serious disease of corruption in this country and in fighting that disease  one may not always have the luxury of giving saving or cutting costs the priority a healthy person can give.


The depth of the mess

Even if you ultimately find justice in the court system against the like of this guy, you will only be dealing with things on the surface which are themselves dependant on the limitations imposed on the like of this guy because of potential prosecution by the government. These later things are to what you see and may potentially deal with outside in the court system are much bigger than the submerged part of an ice burg relative to its top part over the surface of the water. So the question is: If the like of this guy can show outside what he showed here how reasonable are the expectations of real limitations imposed on him inside because of the threat of prosecution from the government? The answer is: BEYOND RIDICULOUS.

Circus Court of Appeals? No, Worse

At least watching a circus show you would know which person is doing which activity. As pointed out in the previous two posts, although the order of 11/26/2013 remained the same, the docket sheet entry for that order indicating toward which defendant it was directed was changed on 1/9/2014 to include the other defendant who had also filed a motion for time extension. So, aside from what changing that entry may say about manipulating a past court order entry in a court docket sheet, there is still no clear indication to whom that order was directed or even to whom the judge who issued the order may claim it was directed.  I could add another response related to the new docket sheet interpretation. But then there is no assurance that the issuer of that order may not claim the older docket sheet interpretation was the correct one. Have you ever expected to see this low level of hiding intentions and/or who is responsible for what being played in a court?

New from that appellate court

In case you thought that was enough, that federal appellate court just added a new thing to its outrageous show .Remember the story mentioned in this post
The wider view to the game
of the required CIP form which I showed with the help of links in that post that I sent overnight on 9/23/2013 but did not show on the docket sheet at least until after  10/6/2013?Later I complained in this post
Late Entries
about the late entries of that court docket sheetThen later in this post
Docket forgery or backdating ?
I showed how some entry was added for a past date which I also showed through many links that it did not exist in the docket sheet before.This thursday a new thing of this kind was added. This order of 11/26/2013
The first extension granting order
which was earlier mentioned in the docket sheet as granting the first time extension request for defendant Action, was changed to be described as also granting that same extension to the other defendant and to whom I did not even give my agreement to that extension.I even referred to that at the end of this post
People Courts, Hedge Fund Guy Chuck-E-Cheese
when I talked about how this recently added defendant filed his brief late without being granted an extension from the court (Notice that post also contained in the second page of the link at the end the original version of that order of 11/26/2013) .
Here is a link showing the new change that happened 1/9/2014  to the past entry of 11/26/2013
Entry of 11/26/2013 on the docket sheet starting from 1/9/2014And here is a link showing how that entry was until the day before (I have so many other links pointing to the same entry for various dates saved to my computer).
Notice also that dependence on the docket sheet description of an order could also be the only way to know to which motion or entity that order was directed unless something in the text of that order also indicate that. Here the text of the order mentioned the word “Appellees'” which could indicate that it is being directed to a plural. But then it was attached to the word “motion” instead of “motions”. So was it directed to a plural or singular entity or just someone playing a game? Now one may say that it was directed to a plural entity but used “motion” instead of “motions” to refer to the identical request in both motions. But then how about when the order mentioned “Appellees’ brief” instead of “Appellees’ briefs”? There is certainly no reason to believe in having identical briefs here. In any case, even if inside the order was clearly indicating to whom it was directed, I do not know any reason for the insufficiency of  the dependence on court docket sheets.


Imagine what is inside

I say, again, if the like of this hedge fund guy can do this outside, imagine what is going on inside the market. I ,personally, do not need to imagine because what is happening here fits adequately with what I have experienced for years in the market and how the SEC is ,if anything, for the service of those guys. Do you think that he who can make the federal courts show publicly the outrageous things they have shown here without excuse would be less capable able in getting what he wants from the SEC and brokerage firms in the darkness of what goes on behind the scenes in the market? Do you think that he who can have such access to a system led by persons whom the Senate vote on each one of them individually is less capable with an entity like the SEC? Do you think that he who can make those in the federal courts do what they did here, or even the basic federal mail service, intentionally ,and apart from all other packages, take my appeal brief to the court at 10:30 in the night, despite his only occasional need for both of those two systems is less capable with a system he always encounter in his main line of business like the SEC?
In case there is anyone who think that seeing what I mentioned there requires more than simple direct knowledge of the related Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) and Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP), here are the related links for anybody to understand on what grounds what I mentioned stands:
The point related to the district court is related to this:
 FRCP Rule 4 (m) states:
“Time Limit for Service. If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period. This subdivision (m) does not apply to service in a foreign country under Rule 4(f) or 4(j)(1)”
The point related to the appellate court is related to this:
FRAP Rule 28 (a) (4) (D)  states regarding a requirement an appeal brief should contain:
“an assertion that the appeal is from a final order or judgment that disposes of all parties’ claims, or information establishing the court of appeals’ jurisdiction on some other basis”
In case that is not clear enough here is more from the Supreme Court about this very well known basic requirement:
“..a party is entitled to a single appeal, to be deferred until final judgment has been entered, in which claims of district court error at any stage of the litigation may be ventilated” (Digital Equipment Corp. v. Desktop Direct, Inc., 511 US 863 – Supreme Court 1994).
Here is also a link showing in the docket sheet of the district court when the case was closed ( #46) and when the appeal was filed (#47).
When the case was closedThe funny thing is that it is when the issue of waiting for a final judgment is usually raised it is with regard to a party seeking to make an early appeal  or had already brought an early appeal and the appellate court arguing for waiting until a final judgment. I doubt that giving a weight for an argument calling for a dismissal because the appeal waited until a final judgment exists anywhere before it was created by the judge of this court of appeals.


The expanded picture being shown here

What is being showed here should serve others who are not fully aware to their environment to wake up and realize what they live in. You live in an environment where the ordinary person moves with the range of a three feet leash within which he had to restrict his activities to conform with the do and don’t of the law. The like of this hedge fund guy, on the other hand, move within the range of a leash, if  any, that is miles and miles in length. The point at which they may suffer consequences of their actions doesn’t appear to be viewable to the naked eye through the distance and for practical purposes they simply appear to be immune from being watched or prosecuted no matter what they do.


The ways of this guy

As usual this hedge fund guy drags down others to do for him what he wants while he himself stays away as far as possible from taking any direct responsibility. I think he did that with Midsummer Investment in his share and manipulation scam of the Viking Systems (VKNG) stock and he did it with those involved in this case who probably did not want things to go this far. I doubt that he reveals his true intentions to even those with him. Instead, I think that although he may show that he is trying to take them on a path that do not exceed  the level of involvement and risk they are willing to accept, in reality, he is not as fully committed to their path as they are and gradually takes them through points of no return and force what they wanted to avoid on them. Anyway, for each his own choices.
With at least some of the games he is playing in this case through those corrupt judges I even doubt that his intention is not showing off what he can do. Nevertheless, one may need to admit that for him to make even district and appellate court judges reach this level of stupidity doing this outrageous level of  clear corrupted work for him publicly may make even those who can recruit suicide bombers wonder how he could be that convincing.

Hard to imagine but,  YES, that was topped

What happened here was as if , first, the district court judge said:
– Look, I am going to issue an order against this plaintiff for doing a basic thing he has the RIGHT to do.
Then he issued an order giving 21 days to serve the complaint and took away the remaining of the 120 days time given to plaintiffs to serve their complaints.
The appellate court judge then looked at that and said:
-You think I cannot top that? I am going to issue an order against this plaintiff for doing a basic thing he was REQUIRED to do.
Then she issued an order granting  the defendant time extension starting from after ruling on a motion calling for a dismissal because the appeal was not filed until the final judgment.

This is your path to justice???

One federal judge, district court judge ,aside from other things he did, suddenly sends me an order to serve my complaint within 21 days and cancels the remaining days of the 120 days given by the FRCP for no reason. Another federal judge, an appellate court judge, treat a motion that try to fault me for failing to violate a required basic appeal procedure as something that needs a consideration and ruling before the defendant can file his brief. The USPS gives the special treatment to my brief of taking it to the court after 10:30 in the night. All happened publicly in front of everybody. This is the path to  justice you make available?  Are you kidding me?

That failure to comprehend

There is still a higher court there I may try for my case. But this not just about that. It is about the unbelievable level of corruption the actions of this hedge fund guy in my case proved to exist in this country and of which he gave samples through those actions. The level of corruption in this country is extremely disgusting. It is as if it took the place emptied by the absence of a dictatorship. Yet, unlike the situation in a dictatorship, people here do not seem to realize and comprehend deeply enough that this is bad and treat it as a normal thing. They also do not seem to realize that,without being forced by an overpowering military with its big machinery, you do not have any excuse accepting the existence of this corruption.


Why did the hedge fund guy pull that thing from this appellate court? Two reasons come to mind. The first one is to postpone ruling on the appeal. The second one is to show me that he has got enough judges that are so on his side to make me lose  the appeal.

Failure to violate the required procedure

Every time I think about this I find it a little hard to resist a laughter.
The situation was as if the defendant said:
-This appeal should be dismissed because this guy waited for the required final judgment before filing it.
And the Appellate Court Judge responded
-I see your point and because of it I grant you a new time extension starting from after we rule on if the appellant failure to violate the required procedure makes a sufficient ground for dismissal.

Three branch government, really? – 2

In other words, you cannot build mud cottages then try to stay away from the complaints of the people living there as if you built concrete buildings for them. The way I see people being nominated and approved by the Executive and Senate branches of government doesn’t seem to come even close to fit the complexity of the size and options in this huge country.


Three branch government, really?

 For the legislative and executive branches of government people get what they throw on themselves . But do the executive branch and the Senate think that their effort in choosing and approving the judiciary branch is of the sufficient quality to create a third branch that is a peer to the other two? You cannot create something in a shallow way then expect it to be of a dependable quality. The executive branch  and the Senate  are only deceiving the people with the illusion that there is really a dependable judiciary branch here?

There are less than 200 appeal court Judges in the entire country and the executive branch  and the Senate even failed in choosing those with the quality and moral standard not to be affected by the like of this hedge fund guy the way that judge did and it seems that what happened here is more of a  sample than the exception.


Can that judge show at least a reasonable doubt?

Forget about justifying it, I just want to hear how can that judge make an argument that could lead to reasonable doubt in that she had unjust intention in granting the defendant’s request. She doesn’t have to prove anything. She just need to make some claim that could reasonably be assumed to be true.

How funny is that?

This could also be added to the layer of outrageousness of that most recent order from the Court of Appeals. It is not only that the motion being waited for a ruling is a frivolous one, but it objects to something that  is required to be followed by the law. The waiting for a final judgment  is a requirement for filing an appeal. So, in other words I am being punished for following what the law required me to follow. Could things be anymore absurd than this?

Do you really realize that?

Do you really realize that the Appellate Court Judge issued an order depending on a ruling on a motion she knows very clearly is a frivolous motion? Anybody alive here?

Impeachment -3

No one should think that I , and especially being originally from a place that was one of the furthest on earth from having this requirement, do not care about having an independent judicial system. But should the attempt to avoid government control and manipulation of the judicial system be allowed to extend to a level permitting this corruption to take its place in achieving that?
Sometimes the government is needed to stay away to make the judicial system works properly away from is effect. Other times it may need to interfere to protect that system from the effect of others. With the level of control and power the like of this hedge fund guy have in this country , the interference by the highest elected legislative body of the government to protect the judicial system of the country, given its history as a democracy, maybe much less risky than leaving things under that kind of power and control.
It is important that one try not to freeze his thinking and view of this country on a snapshot picture of it taken more than two hundred years ago. Things change and what was the biggest danger potential at that time ,after being watched carefully and avoided for sometime, might have been subdued enough to passively allow substantial growth in another risk to take its place. In other words, it is the next in line risk I talked about before.
The Next In Line

Impeachment – 2

I mentioned those two judges because their actions reached a level that meets even the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt that those actions were not serving or intended to serve justice. Of course if someone later shows otherwise then it becomes a different thing. But until then it seems very reasonable to question if there was any good intention behind the actions of those two Judges. In fact, I don’t understand how it could be reasonable not to question that for the kind of actions taken by those two judges if there is a serious interest in having a judicial system that is not a joke.

Layer Under Layer of Outrageousness

Lets see what we have here. We have a defendant, represented by a lawyer firm, who suddenly appeared at the last two days before the deadline for filing its response brief and asked for a time extension of 30 days which is equal to a repetition of the entire time period originally given to it to respond. Although the local rules require that extension requests for more than seven days should be submitted at least seven days before the deadline the defendant submitted his request only two days before the deadline. the defendant did not explain what prevented it from submitting its request earlier. In addition local rules require that the entity submitting such request state with particularity the reasons why it needs that extension of time. The defendant’s motion did not list any significant thing for why it needed the time extension it was requesting. Despite all that the time extension request, to which I myself agreed before the motion requesting it became available, was granted (see Deeper Corruption at the US 11th Circuit Court of Appeal).
 Then the defendant filed a very frivolous motion in direct contradiction with one of the most basic rules for filing an appeal which requires a final judgment ending the case before an appeal could be filed (see Frivolous Motion).
 Then ,again, one or two days before the extended deadline for filing its brief, the defendant made a new request for additional extension of 14 days. Despite the fact that motion was a second time extension request which the court emphasizes how rarely it can be granted, it also came having all the failures and shortcomings mentioned above for the first time extension motion (see Motion for more time extension ).
The new time extension motion requested the 14 days to start from after the date the court rule on the dismissal motion mentioned above. So in effect it was a request for an indefinite time extension that is guaranteed to be at least 14 days. Had such a request ,if ever made, ever granted in the court system of this country? If yes, then was that granting also based on no grounds other than that the court can make a ruling on a motion that would render the defendant’s brief unnecessary? If such reasoning justifies this kind of time extension then courts would have been flooded with similar requests. Finally, assuming the answer to that last question is also yes, is the motion for which the defendant made his case of waiting for a ruling by the court before he files his response brief also based on a very clearly frivolous reasoning that made something from nothing like the dismissal motion of this defendant?
It is only if that request is denied by the court then the defendant would then take 14 days from the due date of the first extension.But the court did grant that request (see Granting an extension starting from after ruling on the dismissal motion ) .
So as you can see here, the court has granted a second time extension to a party who did not even file his first or second time extension requests in a way even close to what the court requires and without stating any reason for that failure, in the unheard of way of starting the new extension time from after it rules on a previous motion without any good reason for waiting for ruling on that motion which , if all that is not enough, is in itself a very clearly frivolous motion.
In addition, one factor that is usually determinant to granting any time extension request ,let alone second request which also doesn’t start counting the additional time until a ruling on a previous motion comes out, is the agreement of the adversary party to that extension. I agreed to the first request and did not agree to anything after that. But still the corrupt judge did not care and granted that very unjustified request.


Bringing it closer to the eyes

In case anyone is unable the outrageousness of the order issued by Judge Beverly B Martin yesterday then I intend to bring that closer to your eyes. If you are in a responsibility position related to this matter and you realize that I am right then the rest will depend on the quality of your intention in carrying your responsibilities.


Granting an extension starting from after ruling on the dismissal motion


Judge Donald L Graham and Judge Beverly B Martin Should both be impeached and removed if the court system here is not a joke.

These are courts? According to what dictionary?

 So help me get this correctly. When you say “courts” here you refer to these things where the like of this hedge fund guy can pull his strings and make “judges” dance the way he likes even publicly in front of everybody?Like I anticipated earlier, I am dealing with a Circus Appeal Court not with Appeal Court .The Circus Court of Appeals


Breaking the corruption scale at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

You know that motion I talked about a week ago asking for another extension of 14 days from after the date the court rules on a motion to dismiss filed earlier by the defendant?

Motion for more time extension 

It was granted yesterday by Judge Beverly B Martin.

Granting an extension starting from after ruling on the dismissal motion

USPS Response for the 10:30 PM court delivery attempt – 2

The fact is that although the response from the USPS would have been very weak even if the package containing my brief to the court was delivered late or even lost altogether, the response from the USPS here regarding the event in question is even much weaker. That is because the event in question does not even allow interpretations based on mistakes and less than expected performance from the USPS. The only interpretation that event allows is that of an intentional action because it is not in line in any way with how the USPS does its delivery business and clearly required more instead of less effort and attention to be carried out. If delivering the package within the normal business hours was not feasible, the path of waiting for the next day is not only the normal and better and closer to mind path than attempting delivery of the package after 10:30 in the night but also the one that requires less effort and less special attention.
The level of corruption the like of this hedge fund guy enjoy in this country made him act within the luxury of choosing a very unusual and for which it is the hardest to come up with an excuse plan and made the USPS do it for him. By delivering the package late so the court wont receive it at the delivery time and leaving a note the event would represent a situation for the package to be stuck in neither received nor not received. The brief was mailed on the last filing day allowed (date of filing for an appeal brief is the date of mailing it) so it wouldn’t have been without complications had I tried to send substitute copies. In addition, there is the  possibility that could be argued as being a failure to timely file the brief by the opposing party. A lawyer experienced in dealing with such technicalities of the courts probably could have found his way through such situation easily but the same cannot be said about a layman like me and the hedge fund guy knows that.
It is very clear that the delivery attempt for my brief to that court at 10:30 in the night was part of a plan arranged with the USPS.It is a very low probability, if any, that event was not part of that conspiracy plan. And if one wonder if there could have been some kind of special events or incidents that led to that delivery attempt, the response from the USPS significantly cancelled even that unsupported assumed probability. The most significant way with which the response from the USPS had cancelled such possibility was when it mentioned that “we cannot state with certainty what actually happened after that time and the carrier cannot recall”. That is because by stating that he/she cant recall what happened, the carrier is indirectly suggesting through his own admission the absence of any other significant event or incident that could have led to a delivery attempt to the court at 10:30 in the night. In addition, although any claim that the delivery attempt at 10:30 PM did not really happen, is weak and can be refuted through various elements of the whole picture, that statement from the carrier proves more that the event really happened. That is because only someone who is trying to avoid the possibility of facts revealing things different from what he is saying would claim that he cannot recall such an  unusual event. Otherwise he should have responded that he did not attempt to deliver any package to the court after 10:30 in the night.



USPS Response for the 10:30 PM court delivery attempt

 This is how the usps responded to the complaint I mailed the Postmaster General and others, after failure of the internet contact to lead any suitable reaction, regarding taking my brief to be delivered to the Court of Appeals at 10:30 in the night (see USPS took my brief to the court at 10:30 in the night)
How probable is it that someone who him/herself is not only careless about this kind of corruption but part of it would write a response like that or forward to someone to write a response like that?

Look at this part and see if it signify any other conclusion:

” Unfortunately, we cannot state with certainty what actually happened after that time and the carrier cannot recall. For some reason, the delivery action was not scanned. This could have been human error on the part of the carrier, due to the extremely large volume of mail the US Court of Appeals receives. Or, there may have been issues with the barcode that prevented the scan. The subsequent scans were not on the actual mail piece but rather system generated entries to account for the non-delivery event.”
So, what are they saying here? That the system data was wrong and shouldn’t be trusted? If so then they are merely replacing or justifying one questionable thing with another that itself may need a longer series of explanations.

Again it is very clear that this response was intended to deny and defend rather than seeking the truth. Nevertheless, lets take a detailed look at some of what is there.

First they say that they ” cannot state with certainty what actually happened” ,yet they still appear to be able to state confidently that ” The subsequent scans” were “system generated entries to account for the non-delivery event”.
Also does that happen with all other packages that the system ” account for the non-delivery event” in the same manner? Does it also always state the time of the delivery attempt at 10:32 PM? Does it always state that “Business Closed” on it own? Does it always state that ” Notice left” without really knowing that and claims to the customers things that could be false? (see USPS delivery attempt to the court after 10:30 PM and Top of above page showing tracking number)
As for the “extremely large volume of mail” to the court, nobody told me that was the last day before the court took a vacation. What? The court did not close for a vacation the next day? Then that “extremely large volume of mail” to the US Court of Appeals is countered by how the USPS is accustomed to the usual business of the court. In addition, assuming that there was unusual volume on that day shouldn’t that also increase the chances of more errors happened on that day with other packages? Why just mine? Even if there were more errors and complaints from customers related to delivery in that date how many of those errors was similar to what happened to my package? In fact, I doubt one could find a similar thing in  a range of years and for the entire court system of the country not to mention one day and for one court.
They also claim that ” the carrier cannot recall”. Aside from the fact that it was not a package of the common size because of its containing seven copies of the brief with their covers which probably should make it more noticeable, what does that claim even mean? Even if the carrier doesn’t remember what happened to my package specifically how could he fail to remember if he took a package ,any package, to the court at 10:30 in the night or not?They also said that they apologize if “the information on usps.com was in anyway confusing or misleading” when, in fact, I did not complain about the descriptions of the actions on the tracking website. I complained about the actions themselves. It is they who tried to shift the responsibility of what happened to the system in their letter.
Finally, they wanted to even reach a higher level of shameless pretending in lack of understanding so they made their way in offering refund to me.

People Courts, Hedge Fund Guy Chuck E-Cheese

The same defendant lawyer which filed the time enlargement motion talked about here

Deeper Corruption at the US 11th Circuit..
then outdone himself filing this motion to dismiss my appeal

 has done it again and filed this motion for additional 14 days extension
Motion for more time extension   .
 But wait, you haven’t heard the punchline of this one yet. He wants the 14 days extension to start from after the court rule on his motion to dismiss mentioned above .Only if that is not granted to him then he would take 14 days from the due date.
 Of course one could ask for this additional time extension just to cover that his earlier extension (enlargement) request was for the purpose of only taking more time.
Instead of this lawyer filing his brief on the due date of the 30 day time enlargement that was granted to him another defendant lawyer filed his brief on that date. That lawyer wasn’t granted any time extension by the court and I did not agree to his request. Nevertheless he still filed his brief on is own.You can see using the links here to the docket entries at the court that the entity who filed its brief on 12/20/2013 was not granted any time extension.Defendant lawyer filing on his own .

Bugs Bunny Cartoon V. SEC Corruption

 In a previous post I compared the unreasonableness of what the like of this guy may do in the market and the SEC act like there is nothing because of its corruption to the like of a Bugs Bunny Cartoon. Of course I understand that comparison could be exaggerated. After all, one may not be able to generalize such level of things lacking sufficient reasonable sense to all cartoon. For example, during some period this hedge fund guy was manipulating the volume of one of the stocks I owned to show too much trading at low prices. That stock was barely trading to a level that even reaching a volume of 10k shares traded is considered generally something unusual. After this guy started playing his volume in inflating game he in one of the days made it show a 30 million shares traded . That was not for the entire day,no, but just during the first half hour of the day.
There are so many examples of this kind and this hedge fund guy never hesitates to challenge the environment by showing the most unreasonable thing knowing that no body would go after him. But why go far? There is more than enough of that game in this case of Onteco Corporation which I took to the court.
Anyway, going back to the 30 million shares in half hour example above I sent that to the SEC trying to bring things even closer to their view sight  but again it ,and reasonably so ,failed in changing the course intentional failure because of corruption take things.

 Corruption at brokerage firms

The level of corruption at the brokerage firms involved even that
this guy can stop my buying order from being executed despite being
at the ask or higher.

The story of the transfer request

It is my understanding that at the beginning those inside Onteco Corporation working for this hedge fund guy wanted to resist the dilution path to which he led them later. So after seeing the way I was able to buy the amount of shares I bought with millions of shares easily thrown to me when I place an order I had my doubts and wanted to check to see if I was really receiving those shares in my account. The account in which my buying of this stock was concentrated at that time was my account with Fidelity . The test I wanted to do was to transfer those shares from that account to another account of mine.While that may not sufficiently prove that those shares were really delivered to my account it would at least provide a better sign for that.
I tried two or three brokerage firms with which I have or had accounts. I don’t remember exactly how many but I remember that I became confident that they did not want to do it because they were cooperating and covering for Fidelity and that I most probably can easily show a similar response from other brokers to anyone seeking more samples.All the transfer requests started with the brokerage firm accepting my application without any problem like a very routine procedure. Then it was very obvious that after they make contact with Fidelity they come with various excuses. The difference between the way they were accepting to do the transfer at the beginning ,without stating any of those objection even days after receiving the application, and the way they acted later was very clear. They were all clearly excuses intended to avoid doing the transfer because most probably ,as I suspected,Fidelity was cooperating with the hedge fund guy by enabling him to sell a big amount of shares without requiring him to really deliver those shares. Scottrade went far enough to later even fabricating a new specially designed rule that they do not accept transfer of penny stocks as the reason for not transferring the shares.

Notice that I am aware that the above might be seen as conflicting with what I said in the story of Viking Systems (VKNG) that the hedge fund guy sent SEC officials to pretend (although very poorly) that they were interested in investigating my complaint while their real intention was to find out for the hedge fund guy if it was me who made the big buying on 10/22/2009 or some other hedge fund guy. Now one might say: if he has the power to do what you described above why would he need the SEC to find out your position of a stock?

The answer to that is, yes, if the same thing happens today he probably wouldn’t choose the SEC to find out my position at Scottrade or any other broker but at that time he did. Why? Probably because at that time he did not know with which broker I had my account and /or did not dig sufficient connections to find out about my account or have the special services he wanted from the brokerage firm so he used the SEC path for being the ready easy one. In any case I clearly stand by what I said in there and here without any hesitation.

Probably just for fun

One of the games this hedge fund guy played and could be just for fun is this. I once lost access to my bank account (the same bank I think he wanted to attack because they did not as easily provide him access to my account as did other financial institutions so he made a cyber attack and spread it to also include other banks then blamed it on china to throw away suspicion). Every time I contact the phone number related to that matter I hear the name of the bank followed immediately by “Good by” and the phone call ends. My email to the customer service did not lead to anything special except the suggestion of going to a branch office .It was not only that number  but I also tried and heard the same thing most or all of the other main phone numbers related to individual banking and I kept wondering how could they be OK with their system not functioning to this level. I kept receiving the same message from that phone number every time I call for about a week or more according to what I remember until I decided to go the branch near me to resolve the issue. When I went there they told me that they also need to contact that same number to solve the problem just like me. To my surprise that same number worked fine when called from that branch so I stopped the process and went back to my home to restart and complete that same process. But when I called I again received the same machine response announcing the name of the bank followed by “good by” ending the call. Because of the different response between the branch and my home I thought that I need to also try my cell phone and when I did that everything worked fine just like calling from the branch office.

 As you can see it was a game targeting only me through my land line . I told the customer service when I reached them from my cell phone about what happened but who would believe such a story.
Of course I am aware that he might have played that game entirely through the internet phone company I am with without any involvement from inside the bank. But there also times when my access was temporarily disabled because of what is hard to be seen as other than through internal game.


The process servers I contacted

Almost all the process serving companies I contacted , and I contacted a lot, were clearly contacted by this hedge fund and conspired with him against me. You would think that having a job where they may serve eviction papers on the poor they may at least try to balance that by also serving things on the bad rich and powerful. But no, they appear to be far from feeling such a thing. One of them (Steve Carlyle from Florida Service Of Process) not only accepted the job then did not really try to serve after being contacted by the hedge fund guy but actually he himself actively sought to take my case in order to prevent me from serving the papers using other process servers. Then as an additional service to the hedge fund guy he added additional charges for things we agreed I shouldn’t pay any more after the relatively big charge I already paid him. And guess what? The hedge fund guy made that Discover Card company repeatedly declares the charges as valid despite that I disputed them three times and I have email proof that I shouldn’t be charged.
Anyway, I have things that could show what I am saying here are not baseless accusations in case someone wants to prosecute the like of those not to betray the trust of the people.


Like I mentioned in the story of Viking Systems stock (vkng )(The Earlier VKNG Encounter , The Earlier VKNG Encounter -2),I let most of a gain of more than $2 millions on its way for more, evaporates because of the illegal actions of this guy while I was trying to give him time to correct his mistake to a safer path for him. He then followed that by messing the rest of my investments in other stocks where I recognized his games, from the inside of these companies before they start climbing higher values and something of the kind to what happened with vkng repeats itself.

It is amazing how much readiness there is in many public companies insiders to conspire against their own shareholders with the like of this guy. But why wouldn’t they? What would make them avoid joining someone who had his way with the court system the way this guy did here and can make the USPS take your Brief to the court after 10:30 in the night? Who would prosecute them? The SEC? The SEC may prosecute them if they DON’T.



NSA? What NSA?

 I got this guy watching everything I do on all my computers and tablets using what seems to be viruses written by a professional entity working  for him like an organized crime and still nobody cares?


Frivolous Motion

The same party that submitted the time enlargement motion that was the subject of this post titled Deeper Corruption at the US 11th Circuit Court of Appeal below  yesterday submitted a motion asking for my appeal against their defendant to be dismissed because it was not filed within the 30 days of the judgment dismissing the case against that defendant although it was an interlocutory order not final. It is clearly not a significant probability that they submit such a thing to the court without counting on support from inside allowing them to do that.


**************** 12/5/2013******************

Docket forgery or backdating ?

The link below shows how the docket entry for 11/15/2013 suddenly appeared starting 11/25/2013 and was not there on dockets of dates like the 16, 19, 20 , 21, 22, 24 of November 2013. These links show print screen images of the docket entries for those dates saved which I saved to my computer and that is why there is a local address in the address bar of the browser.

Docket forgery or backdating?

(Tip: to see the image at its actual size continue to double click on it until it reaches the maximum size then double click on and adjust the position of the white rectangle inside the smaller picture on the left side)

I still cant understand how a court serious in conducting its business without a mess would allow docket entries without entry dates.



Deeper Corruption at the US 11th Circuit Court of Appeal

Look at this. On 11/18/2013 I suddenly received a phone call from the lawyer firm of one of the defendants (Action Stock Transfer Corporation) requesting that I agree on an extension for them to file their response brief with the Appellate Court. They did not appear to the court until two days from the due date for them to file their appeal as if they were asleep and their alarm clock just rang. They also were not asking for a day or two but the whole 30 days given to them to respond, again. I agreed which probably was a mistake. Nevertheless, my intention was to make my agreement contingent on the existence of good cause that is far from what the joke of their actions and what they submitted satisfies. In other words I was counting on the court to act reasonably and my agreement was intended not to stand against a court’s decision for a good cause but look at what they did:
1-They appeared only two days before the due date.
2-They failed to comply with 11th Circuit Local Rule 26.1-2 (c) which required them to file within 14 days from the CIP certificate (FRAP 26.1) I filed on the 9/24/2013 a notice with the court indicating their agreement or changes to that certificate.
3-They failed to comply with the 11th Circuit Local Rule 31- 2 (c) which states that “If a party’s first request for an extension of time to file a brief or record excerpts requests an extension of more than seven calendar days, the motion must be filed at least seven calendar days in advance of the due date”. Their due date was on the 20 of November and they filed their motion on the 18th.
4- They also failed to satisfy the particularity requirement stated in 11th Circuit Local Rule 31- 2 (a) which states that “A first request for an extension of more than seven calendar days must be made by written motion setting forth with particularity the facts demonstrating good cause”.Here is what they mentioned as “grounds” for their request (They used “ASTC” to stand for Action Stock Transfer Corporation):”1. Appellee, ASTC’s answer to the Appellant’s Initial Brief is due on November 20, 2013.
2. Appellee is in need of additional time in which to finalize its answer to the Appellant’s Initial Brief.
3. The undersigned has in good faith consulted with Appellant regarding this matter. Appellant has agreed to an enlargement of time of thirty days (30) for ASTC to serve its Answer Brief up to and including December 20, 2013.
4. This is the first request for an extension and it is not being made for any improper purposes or for delay”Do you see any “particularity” here as stated by Local Rule 31- 2 (a)? Do you even find it stating any cause worthy of noticing, not to mention the “good cause” mentioned in that same rule ?Assuming there was a good cause, although clearly there isn’t, where is that other good cause that prevented them from filing that request at least seven days before the due date as required by Local Rule 31- 2 (c)? They did not appear until the last two days before the due date and did not even bother themselves to file their required note of agreement or change with the CIP certificate I filed with the court much earlier.In fact, that same Local Rule 31- 2 (c) which stated the requirement of seven days in advance for such request also went on to say about a motion that fails to satisfy that condition:” Such a motion received by the clerk less than seven calendar days in advance of the due date for filing the brief or record excerpts will generally be denied by the court, unless the motion demonstrates that the good cause on which the motion is based did not exist earlier or was not and with due diligence could not have been known earlier or communicated to the court earlier”Remember, this is not the same as when someone unexpectedly receives a complaint and request an extension of time to respond. This is an appeal process with the notice of appeal served on them much earlier so receiving my brief was expected and the issues are not even new.Notice also, that this is not a party representing itself. It is a lawyer and not just a lawyer from anywhere. It is a lawyer from a state belonging to the same Eleventh US Circuit of Appeal. Compare that to my position here as a layman representing himself and not even in the same appeal circuit. Nevertheless, I only missed on recognizing the CIP form requirement which caused a late filing of only one day (actually only couple of hours) and filed the appendix for the brief one day late. That later thing happened during a time were my brief itself was not delivered properly to the court because of an intentional action by the US mail and I did not even know when ,or even if , it will be received. Yet despite all that confusion and uncertainty and the US mail conspiring with the defendant’s side I was only late only one day and I am one person working by myself. So what happened with that lawyer firm couldn’t he request his secretary to file this motion seven days before the due date if he was taking things with any level of seriousness?
As for my brief, it was filed on time despite that I did not recognize how for my case the requirement of receiving the record from the district court is considered satisfied with the docketing of the appeal notice and as a result of that I got only the 30 days remaining of the 40 days time period which I was under the impression that it hadn’t started yet. I also had to deal with a set of issues of which the issue related to this brief related to Defendant Action is only one item.
Even in the first letter I received which set the time for filing my brief I was told that requests for extension of time will be “frowned upon” by the court, not to mention a request like this.
As you can see, this was far from being a good cause request and one can not see why would it be satisfied by any judge acting in good faith. It is a request that was the result of extreme recklessness or playing games. It asks for no reason for a repetition of the entire period given for it to respond like a child asking for a “do over” in a game he is playing just because he like to have another chance.
Nevertheless, despite all that the request was granted.
By the way, I even sent my brief and appendix to the defendants through priority mail.


Like I mentioned earlier in the story of VKNG before this,this hedge fund guy sold and kept fake shares in the system with those helping him making the strangest and unusual SEC filings and the SEC did not care except to conspire and serve him in making sure if it was me or another hedge fund who suddenly interfered to buy the amount of shares I bought on 10/22/2009. So as you see, if you are one of the like of this guy you can, not only forge shares, but also clearly declare that in your filings with the same institution that was established for the purpose of protecting against such things and nobody cares. You can also follow that by agreement to purchase shares based on market prices while you yourself keep those market prices under pressure and nobody cares.You can then assign fake board members to help you acquire the corporation cheaply later and no body cares. You can even manipulate trading volume beyond what can be on a Bugs Bunny Cartoon and no body would care even if you bring that to their attention.

No body digs after the like of this guy, certainly not the SEC which is nothing more than a protection cover for his kind. After all,think about the audacity of what happened in that district court and things like the 10:30 at night US mail delivery to the Appellate court and you would get an idea about the above the law and freedom to do whatever he wants status to which this guy is accustomed and expects to find.




After all this is it any wonder that we have been eaten alive in the market and the SEC is a phantasy that exists only in the minds of those who think this is still the thirties? Actually, the SEC does really exist but it is to help protect and benefit hedge funds like this.

Accessibility and Transparency

Look at the advantage and empowerment a basic level of transparency through the PACER system gave. God knows if there were equivalent accessibility and transparency on things like judges and jury selection what could have been revealed about the reality of the work process inside courts here.
Even if we assume there would be a prosecution there would also be ample opportunity to stop that at various stages during the process. It is all a joke to the like of this hedge fund guy.

This is corruption not capitalism

While others converted socialism to dictatorships capitalism was converted in this country to extreme corruption. While not the same, both involve controlling and abusing people although it is through less direct means in the later.

Immune from prosecution.  

What happened in this usps mail story shows to what level hedge funds like this are immune from prosecution and control things.

This is how things are showing now

The court’s docket is listing my brief while the USPS tracking is still showing that it is in transit.
The court docket is also showing the date 10/23/2013 beside it. Unlike the filing system for the district court which lists both filing date and entry date, here they list only one date which I take as the filing date (except that for the brief and its appendix the mailing date not the arrival date is the filing date). But here on that date only a note was left for them at 10:30 in the night so it means that they counted receiving the note same as receiving the package. Nevertheless, any attempt to correct the situation by the court will not in any way justify what happened or undo the very clearly unavoidable conclusion that there was a conspiracy here with USPS mail of that area. Why would the court care about protecting the USPS mail? Because apparently the clerk office of that court wanted to take the pressure of a partner in the game. It is a three partners game played by the hedge fund guy, the USPS mail and the clerk office of that court and they may try to shift the related responsibility or provide protection among themselves for the best possible arrangement. Although I was busy talking about only a part of that picture, that was my understanding for the situation and is not something I just reached and I intend to post what supports that.

“Land of the free”

I wonder how does land of the corrupt look like?

In case not enough

In addition ,in case the SEC and corruption in courts and every thing else is not enough for the poor hedge fund guys like this guy here, you now have an fbi director who wanted to correct the market by prosecuting Martha Stewart and he himself may have relationships and connections to the like of this hedge fund guy because he himself worked for a hedge fund. It is not like the previous one’s obsession with trapping some idiots by selling them some Nerf weapons then claiming a victory in the fight over “terrorism” was doing anything to correct the extreme corruption here but at least one would have less reason to believe that he is intentionally tilted to the other side.

Imagine what is inside

Again like I said about the outrageous things that came from that district court, if this is what hedge funds like this can do outside in front of everybody imagine what is going on inside where no one outside can see and you have to depend on the oversight of the government over them, LOL.

Imagine what is inside

Again like I said about the outrageous things that came from that district court, if this is what hedge funds like this can do outside in front of everybody imagine what is going on inside where no one outside can see and you have to depend on the oversight of the government over them, LOL.

A Theoretical Conversation

Imagine this theoretical conversation between me and another person before I mailed that brief of mine:
-I am mailing my papers to the court of appeals and I am afraid some game will be played and they won’t receive it?
-Why would they not receive it?
-I don’t know the hedge fund guy play some kind of a game to prevent my mail from reaching its target.
– Are you using private shippers like UPS or FedEx?
-No just the regular mail.
-So in your paranoid mind you think that someone will be able to conspire with the federal mail system that on which courts and every one had depended for over two hundreds years just against your mail to that court? And how would your delusion make you think that would happen? Losing your package? Delivering it very late? Who knows? Maybe the mail office there will even give your package the special treatment of working late very far from their normal hours in order to take your package late in the night to the court after it is closed so it miss receiving it, LOL.
And that was exactly what happened.

What is astonishing in this recent thing

Delivering my package to that court at 10:30 in the night was not the kind of events like, for example, losing the package or delivering it days later that one may be able to provide an excuse for it. This action on the other hand is very far from being fit for even any argument that is  just reasonable on its face and helps in seeing that action as anything other than an intentional action that is not a consequence of any difficulties or serves any legitimate purpose. There were very clear and under sun light two opposite sides the law side and the very unjustifiably against the law hedge fund guy’s side and the one who did that action chose the hedge fund’s side.
It is clearly not very hard to see disregard to the consequences made by those with ,for example, suicidal intentions or those who intend to flee. But for someone living like everybody else to choose, publicly and under the sun, that hedge fund guy’s side despite how clearly unjustifiably it is against the law side is what astonishes the mind here. In other words, despite the direct contradiction between the law side and the hedge fund guy’s side here, that person ,while still not counting himself as external to the system, publicly chose to bet on the hedge fund’s side. That shows you what power hedge funds like this have over the government and the system here.


For the hedge fund guy to stop even the federal mail system I used from delivering my papers to the court is beyond outrageous and shameful. Anything left ??????????


But why would he hesitate to take the audacity of his actions to this level. It is not like that district court was anything other than a joke in its outrageous rulings in serving him. The whole thing was very clearly ridiculously out of the usual way things should be fairly done to begin with and it  passed like nothing happened.


USPS attempted delivery after 10:30 PM

Want more things showing the outrageous corruption for and control by hedge funds like this guy in this country? Here is one more: I sent my appellate brief to the eleventh US circuit court of appeals on Monday using USPS Priority.When do you expect it was attempted to be delivered ? Wednesday? Thursday? Friday? None of that. I was not delivered on any of these days during normal business hours. It was attempted to be delivered to the court after 10:30 PM Wednesday. How about that? Anyone seen this happen before? Then in their tracking they mention “Business Closed”.Of course the business was closed. What court is open for regular mail delivery at 10 PM?
I ,in fact, anticipated that the hedge fund guy might be playing games through the mail delivery this time. Nevertheless for a mail man to attempt delivery of my mail to that court at 10 PM in the night was never expected and I just noticed it this day evening.
Why would a mail man deliver what I sent to that court at 10 PM? It was “out for delivery” before 9 am on the same day so what took that long? Assuming there was a reason for failing to deliver it during normal business hours on the same day, why not deliver it in the normal business hours of the next day? But it is very clear that the intention was to deliver my package to that court when it is closed. How can corruption be any more audacious?
What is the purpose behind this game? One possibility is avoiding receiving my brief until it gets returned back to me. The other possibility is control of timing to make my case fall to specific judges whom the hedge fund wants. By not receiving my brief when it came the clerk’s office may later choose the best timing to bring it based on the work load on the hedge fund’s preferred judges and make it assigned to those judges. In addition about third of the judges in that court of appeals are selected by other judges and not a real appellate judges.


USPS delivery attempt to the court after 10:30 PM

Top of above page showing tracking number

The tracking number is: 9114901159818640372360




You won’t be left alone

Actually, what is generally called  “freedom” here is only freedom from being oppressed by the government. But unless sufficient intentional efforts were put to protect from other forces trying to fill that gap, people would be oppressed by the next in line force which happened to be the financial power in this case.
You won’t be left alone . And having the tool of a government you can choose is a big step that can empower the path to freedom but it is not in itself the final destination.

Sunday  22, 2013


From Freedom  To Corruption

Congratulations, freedom has been converted here to a very deep corruption. Moreover, like a person with neurosis who requires even more intensive level of treatment because his spoiled ego sees his neurosis as good thing, not much can be seen in concern about the problem.
September  22, 2013

” Justice For All”

That is the slogan here and these are the corrupted government agencies and the courts and how they work for this hedge fund guy and the like of him. So what could have happened had that not been the slogan here? Congress and the president would have had gladly allowed the hedge fund guy to use a Drone to attack me?


Saturday  21, 2013

Thursday, September 19, 2013

The Earlier VKNG Encounter -2

Here are some links related to that story
Midsummer’s  filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock:
 Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock -01
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock – 02
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock – 03
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock – 04
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock – 05
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock -06
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock -07
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock -08
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock -09
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock -10
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock -11
Midsummer’s filed selling of Viking System’s (VKNG) stock – 12
Midsummer’s  unseen before in the market and very hard to be believed claim of buying back for all the shares it sold according to the fillings above:
Although it is not needed to prove that my buying on 10/22/2009 was from a hedge fund, here are links showing an entity filing that support it sold an amount of shares equal to those I bought on 10/22/2009 :
First, here the entity filing an ownership 1977394  shares on  10/26/2009 four days after my buying on 10/22/2009. Note also the “October 22, 2009” mentioned at the first page as an answer for “(Date of Event which Requires Filing of this Statement)”.
Now, here is the February 13, 2009  for that same entity which is the most recent ownership filing before the filing above and it shows an ownership of 4227394.
Subtract the first number (1977394) from the second (4227394) and you will reach 2250000 shares which clearly can include the shares I bought on  10/22/2009 (2159247).
 [(Added 9/20/2013)
The stock stayed on the SHO List not only for 13 days continuously but from 11/14/2009 to 1/4/2010 continuously. Here is link where the reader can click on all the dates in the range mentioned above and see the “VKNG”  in the list of all those dates.ftp://ftp.nasdaqtrader.com/SymbolDirectory/regsho/]

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

I don’t want to dwell too long on the topic of the preceding post except to add that encouragement of entrepreneurship ,if not being used as an excuse to favor some group over other ,may require a scope of view that is wider and more comprehensive than it seems to be implemented in this country. There should be a balance between encouraging entrepreneurship for a specific line of business in contrast to that of the entire market. That balance seems to be missing here. Maintaining that balance may require the government to enter as a competitor in one line of business so that it can support entrepreneurship for the rest of the market.

Monday, September 16, 2013

I just want to know why governments (states and federal) is not allowed to enter into the car insurance business? Or is this also one of the things that gives unfair privilege in this country to those with big wealth? I think that governments, especially the federal government because it has better means to do that, should be allowed to enter and compete in any business. Having the government enter as a competitor can help in to two directions. First,clearly, it can provide a significant help in filling the gaps between product pricing and the paying capabilities of potential buyers and in turn help in keeping the wheel of the economy turning. Second, it may provide a way to prevent monopoly and price fixing among those who are supposed to be competitors in away that even antitrust laws cannot reach.
Imagine how this idea can improve the economy:Those who are running businesses should always keep in mind that the government may enter any business if they do not compete in a way sufficient to close the gap that provide an opportunity for such entrance. One of the most obvious and direct implementation for that seems to be in that of car insurance business. What is an insurance business? It is nothing more than some entity saying: Hey I got too much money in case something happen. Who is better equipped to say that than the federal government? An insurance business is just an accumulation of financial power because of which further accumulation is allowed. There is no science or any special capabilities needed.So what prevents the federal government from entering such business other than being on the side of the most wealthy instead of all the people? Look at the prices for car insurances then think if you can even make a claim that there is a serious competition there. Car insurance companies can probably charge less than one forth what they charge and still make big profit. Is there any question that the federal government can compete successfully there?
Also, if I am going to pay more money then why not at least make that goes to where it can return as a benefit for all people rather than making the most wealthy even wealthier through such a business. This is how you improve the economy for any one really interested in that more than he is in serving the most wealthy over everybody else.

Saturday, September 14, 2013

Shortcomings Of The Executive Branch

The shortcomings of  congress in implementing a real and fair justice system that works on everybody including those with the financial and connections power are very substantial because courts provide last resort to seek justice. Otherwise, the failure starts with the top of the executive branch. For example, when it comes to the SEC, those who has been coming to the top of the executive branch in this country apparently think that all what they have to do is just assign a head to that entity and, in their walking over the rainbow world, they think that everything will be OK for an entity that ,if wanted to continue, would need extreme cleaning from its most basic level and roots.

Friday, September 13, 2013

If I was the one with the authority

 I cannot imagine myself not turning the world upside down if  I was the one with the authority like those in congress and someone showed me the brazen things I showed here in the federal court system . Those things showed that the system is far from being fit to be trusted especially when things come to those with the connections and financial power. The reaction I saw, instead, was that of people who lack the will to fight corruption and correct things as if they live in a dictatorship.

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Courts here and standing in dilution cases-4

Like I said earlier, I am back to this topic. I intend to make this argument short and clear. Here is one current reasoning of mine in dealing with the technical level.
Even if we consider “Authorized Shares” in the article of incorporation to mean that the generated shares will be owned by the corporation then the reasonable way to understand that would be in  it is being a conditional ownership. In other words, ownership  by the corporation for the generated shares won’t start unless those shares were generated for the best interest of shareholders. What calls for this understanding is that ,unlike the initial capital for example, Authorized Shares can be used in a way that is for the best interest of the corporation but not necessarily for the best interest of shareholders. [(Added 9/12/2013) Notice that the preceding statement also imply that even in cases where there is also an injury to the corporation a sufficient path to recovery for shareholders through the corporation equivalent  to that through direct standing may not exist].Since it is reasonable to assume that , from the start, owners of corporations do not want to give away their ownership unless it is for their best interest, it follows from that that conditional ownership by the corporation for any shares generated as part from the Authorized Shares.[(Added 9/12/2013)  Let me state that in another way. Since it does not make sense that owners of a corporation would choose to authorize a power that can be used to take away their ownership in the corporation for other than their best interest with no right for them to demand legal recovery while there is a better alternative, then the ownership by the corporation for shares issued as part of the Authorized Shares needs to be understood as being contingent on that issuance being for the best interest of shareholders].That means unless shares were generated (issued) for the best interest of shareholders then ownership by the corporation for those shares did not happen and therefore shareholders still have their direct standing to bring  lawsuits in dilution cases.
Posted by at No comments:    

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook

Monday, September 9, 2013

The Earlier VKNG Encounter

Flashback to the preceding post:
I started trading stocks from August 2004. Two years after that ,in 2006, while watching the trading of a small/micro cap stock I was holding I started paying attention to how the selling of shares there seemed to be part of an attempt to pressure the price of the stock rather than trying to get the best price possible. I complained to the SEC and as a result of that my name was revealed to the hedge fund guy who was the same guy here. Anyway, later I started to pay attention and recognize the same thing everywhere I go in the world of small/micro cap stock. For years and years, I also wrote about it in the message boards of these stocks and my writings sounded weird and drew very little ,if any, expressed agreement. That did not affect my believe in what I thought was very clear and I became more interested in making a lemonade from these kind of lemon. In October 2009 I noticed what seemed to me as one opportunity to apply that understanding of mine on a stock that seemed to be played in that same way on the stock of a public corporation (at that time) called Viking Systems which was trading under the ticker VKNG. I noticed that the stock was being pushed down to an extremely low prices.On 10/22/2009 I jumped in and bought over 2 million shares for less than $13000. The guy playing the stock was this same hedge fund guy here and he did not care about selling me all these shares. In fact, if I wanted I probably could have bought much more from him in the next days at also extremely cheap prices but I had to stop buying because of the filing requirement on 5 percent owners of individual investors (According to 17 CFR 240.13d-1 (b) (2) it seems that a hedge fund,on the other hand,can acquire and dispose of ownership less than  10 percent as much as it like and wouldn’t have to file unless it has that ownership on the last day of the year). A few days after that the stock started to move higher and reached over $1 a share before the middle of November 2009. Along the way,this hedge fund guy continued his pressure on the stock ignoring the reality that he himself chose. He did not have enough shares to do that and as a result the stock entered the Regulation SHO Threshold Security List (SHO list) three times. The SHO regulation is related to the selling of shares without really delivering those shares to the buyers account. If these shares reach a specific percentage and remain at that percentage for a specific period of time then the seller of those shares (or his broker) will need to buy and deliver those shares .Yes, I know,it is absurd. It is like saying you can steal but don’t exaggerate too much. However this the best individual investors can get from the legislators and regulators. If that was not enough, consider when was this regulation enacted? 1934?No. 1950?No.1965?No.1980?No.1990?No .It was not until 2005 that apparently they reached the recognition that selling nothing as shares is not acceptable. Anyway, returning back to the main story here, the hedge fund guy sold enough fake non existent shares to make the stock goes to that SHO list three times. At least in one of these three times it stayed long enough there to satisfy the buying back requirement of the SHO Regulation while in the other two it came very close.[(Added 9/20/2013) Checking back the record shows that actually the stock stayed on the SHO List from  11/14/2009 to 1/4/2010 continuously].  Nevertheless there was not any noticeable buying back and the pressure on the stock at low prices continued. It was not unreasonable to expect that buying back of these shares could have resulted in the stock reaching a price higher than $5 a share because of how squeezed this guy was.In fact that could be an understatement.Yet, there was not anything to indicate that even a part of that required buying of shares to be delivered to those who bought shares that were not delivered to them. Instead of that there was something that even on its own and without any of the above should have aroused a great suspicion to investigate what was going on. That thing was a sears of SEC fillings the like of which I had not and still have not seen. These SEC filings were filed on 12/14/2009, 12/15/2009, 12/17/2009,12/18/2009 by a company called Midsummer Investment Limited. This company initially filed that it sold millions of shares after the stock started moving higher starting from 11/03/2009 and filed on 11/16/2009. The newer filings on the dates mentioned above all contained this very unusual paragraph with variations only in the number of shares mentioned which I wrote in italics here

“On November 16, 2009, the Reporting Person filed 12 Form 4s reporting the disposition of shares of Common Stock of the Issuer (Accession Numbers 0001144204-09-059660 through 0001144204-09-059664, 0001144204-09-059666 through 0001144204-09-059670, 0001144204-09-059672 and 0001144204-09-059663, collectively, the “November Filings”). Subsequent to the disposition of the sales, on account of the failure to obtain legal transfer of the sold shares through the issuer, the Reporting Person’s broker involuntarily elected to buy 451,000 shares previously reported as sold by the Reporting Person to cover the sales disclosed in the November Filings. The Reporting Person does not consent to nor has it exercised any discretion or control over the buy-in. Accordingly, this filing reverses the previously reported sale of 451,000 shares of common stock pursuant to the November Filings”
There were 2428000 shares in total reported in these filings which probably represented all the shares initially filed as sold. [(Added 9/15/2013) There was no need to say “probably” in the preceding sentence since I did count them and they are exactly the same number]. So, there were supposedly a buying back that ,again supposedly, reversed the initial selling of all these shares. There was not any indication that this buying of shares really happened. How this buying happened?From whom? People were talking about the stock in messages boards and none of them spoke about a buying back happened to him/her. Again,there were absolutely nothing supporting that claimed buying back really took place.This made the suspicion that 2428000 fake shares sold and kept in the system unavoidable.
Less than a month later I started telling this hedge fund guy through a message board on which he posts frequently that the game he was playing with that claimed buyback should be corrected or he will be reported. I had over $2 millions of gain and a potential of a much higher price because this guy was squeezed which all were taken down and stayed down because of the support of that fake buyback claim but I still wanted to give this guy time to realize the danger of the game of he played.
I waited for more than a 100 days trying to give this hedge fund guy time to deal with reality and manage himself in a fair way. What he did instead was to go to the company and offer them financing they were looking for at terms that sounded very tempting in exchange of shares. He sent a company called Dutchess Opportunity Fund, II, LP and made that deal through it. [(Added 9/10/2013) To be fair, the agreement was signed two days before I started writing about that buy back trick] .That financing deal gives the company the right to sell Dutchess shares anytime time they want based on a price that is only discounted by 4 percent from the market price. Initially I complemented those inside Viking Systems for getting such a deal. I based that complement on what is in the deal on its face while depending on the judgment of those inside with regard to how real it was and what was behind it. After a while I realized that the Dutchess was only a face and this guy was behind it. Who would accept to put himself under obligation to buy shares based on market price chosen any time by the seller without any restrictions? I don’t think Goldman Sachs would accept such a risk not to mention a small fund. Moreover, who would want to take such a risk with a stock that jumped from under a penny a to over a dollar a share within less than a month? One thing that would make taking such risk reasonable is if Dutchess was counting on someone to keep the pressure on the stock inside the market. The financing agreement with Dutchess was also contingent on registering with the SEC for resale in the market 15 million shares.The company (specifically those who get this financing the CFO and/or the CEO) couldn’t get financing anywhere before that not to mention one with such terms .All these and other factors and the timing of the deal made the conclusion that Dutchess was only a face and extension to this hedge fund guy unavoidable.
After realizing this I started writing to the SEC about that earlier strange filing and the rest of the story here. But that was after over a hundred days and millions of shares were already added through this financing agreement which may at least cover the original problem at the surface level. That doesn’t mean that the initial game became untraceable. But one try as much as possible not to give any excuse to that fake entity called the SEC.What really changed by the passing of time ,however, is that the hedge fund guy had already dragged with him some of those on his side who were not inclined to take the unnecessary risk he was taking but lacked the will power to refuse continuing with him. Had I started fighting back early I probably could have strengthened that side of them.
But if you think the role of the SEC with the like of this hedge fund guy is only to stay away from investigating and prosecuting them then you are mistaken. It is also there to protect and serve. It may act to protect them from justice and also to serve their unjust actions. For after sending my complaints ,to my surprise,this time I received a response. That response came from the office of the SEC in New York which claimed that they want to make a teleconference with me regarding my complaint. Although at the beginning I tried to be more optimistic, by the end of the day I could no longer keep even a modest amount of hope that their interest in my case was real. It was very clear that they did not care about my complaint. Although I would still have seen it clearly without knowing what was their real intention, I had a very strong suspicion about what they really wanted and that suspicion became firmly established after attending that conference call they wanted. What they were really interested in was serving the hedge fund guy. Although he had his suspicions because of my posting and big interest in the stock, it appears that the hedge fund guy wanted to make sure I was the one who jumped in and made that big buy of the stock and not another hedge fund and for that purpose he used the SEC to extract that information.Here is some of what I wrote about that. At that time I was still not revealing my early entry and the position I made.http://unallowedthoughts.blogspot.com/2010/07/corruption-beyond-belief-inside-sec.html
For this hedge fund guy, with the help of the shares he was acquiring through his Dutchess face were able to keep the price continuously under pressure inside the market on the stock. Then, taking advantage of the low price in the market which he himself was causing,in May 5, 2011 the hedge fund guy came again through a third face to buy shares in private placement.Of course, it can be much cheaper to buy shares through a private placement after the stock was kept at low price all that time than at the beginning.The new face he came through was a company called Clinton Group,Inc. (the investment manager of Clinton Magnolia Master Fund,Ltd.) and acquired 12 million shares and 9 million warrants exercisable at 25 cents a share for a total of $3 millions. In addition, although he had already acquired over 10.97 million shares through Dutchess financing agreement, he also made the deal contingent on registering for resale with the SEC those 12 million shares acquired in the private placement and it was declared effective with the SEC without any problem.
Midsummer Investment (the company who made the strange filings talked about earlier), “sold” all its holding of the stock (7,223,457 shares and 5,551,034 warrants) to the Clinton Group at the same time when that financing agreement was made. That shows even more how much these actions really belong to parties who are acting as separate entities or in fact parties acting as one entity with these games.
That claimed transfer of ownership also helped avoiding a restriction on the conversion of those warrants held by Midsummer not to lead to Midsummer’s ownership exceeding 4.99 percent of the total outstanding shares.
The next step after that for the hedge fund guy was to use the ownership he made in the corporation to have his directors added to the board and three of them were added.
Now that he has his directors inside ,and certainly is  even in a much better position to keep the pressure on the stock price inside the market, he came through a company called Conmed to take the company through a merger. The offer price of 27 cents a share was empowered by how it sounded relative to the market prices which he himself had been keeping down under pressure.The merger agreement was agreed on by the three added directors and only one of the original directors with the rest of the original board abstaining from voting.
After all that, he did not wait long to play the kind of manipulation he played in this case and repeat the arrogant response in the manner I described in the preceding post.
This was only a summery and more could be added and elaborated on.