Lawsuit Filed Against American Resource Exploration (AREN) For Violations of Spam Email Statute

3
George Sharp
3525 Del Mar Heights Road, #620
San Diego, CA 92130
(310) 498-4455
(619) 446-6717 fax
In Propria Persona
1
2
5
6
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CENTRAL DIVISION
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
)
America Exploration Resources, Inc. )
)
and DOES 1 through 500, inclusive,
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
_____________________________________ )
)
GEORGE SHARP,
Case No.
COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF
CALIFORNIA RESTRICTIONS ON
UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL EMAIL ADVERTISERS (Cal. Bus. &
Prof. Code 17529.5)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1COMPLAINT
COMES NOW PLAINTIFF AND ALLEGES AS FOLLOWS:
1. At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff Sharp, SHARP was a resident
of San Diego County, California. SHARP has become recognized internationally
as a crusader against penny stock fraud and has been loudly applauded for his
efforts. There is no question that penny stock fraud is a scourge of society, having
replaced confidence games like Three Card Monte and Ponzi-schemes and
pyramid schemes as a way to relieve innocent victims most susceptible to get-rich-
quick schemes, such as seniors, students and single mothers, of their savings.
Spam emails making false and deceiving claims, are just one of several methods
10
used to lure potential dupes into such schemes. To date, the Plaintiff has been
11
lauded on several reputable internet sites and has received hundreds of letters from
12
these victims, thanking him for his efforts to inhibit this fraud. SHARP is also
13
well known for prosecuting civil actions against penny stock frauds, designed to
14
enrich insiders, officers and financers of small public companies through the
15
marketing and sale of artificially overpriced and often intrinsically worthless stock
16
to an often unsuspecting public. SHARP has been interviewed by the press and
17
appeared on television with respect to penny stock schemes that he first exposed.
18
2.
SHARP owns and at all times mentioned, owned a computer with an
19
internet connection. SHARP regularly uses this computer to access his email
20
accounts. This computer is located in the State of California in the County of San
21
Diego. SHARP received all spam emails referenced herein through his Internet
22
Service Provider, whose equipment is located in the State of California.
23
3.
Defendant America Resources Exploration, Inc. (AREN), is a
24
publicly traded Nevada Corporation, trading on the Over-the-Counter market under
25
the symbol AREN and with a listed place of business at 113 Barksdale, Newark,
26
DE 19711.
27
28
4.
Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names of defendants sued herein as
DOES 1 through 500, inclusive, and therefore sues these defendants by such
-2COMPLAINT
fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to allege their true names and
capacities when ascertained. Any allegation against any defendant shall apply to
each DOE defendant
5.
Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on such information and belief
alleges, that at all times herein mentioned, each defendant was the agent of each
and every other defendant, and in doing the things alleged herein, was acting in the
course and scope of its/his agency and/or employment and was acting with the
consent, permission and/or authorization of each and every remaining defendant.
The acts and conduct of each defendant herein was ratified and approved by every
10
remaining defendant.
11
6.
Jurisdiction is appropriate in this court as the Defendants maintained
12
continuous and systematic contact with the State of California by disseminating
13
these emails to thousands of residents who own and operate computers within this
14
State.
15
7.
Plaintiff is informed and believes that the Defendants participated
16
and/or conspired in a scheme to disseminate spam emails which: (a) contained a
17
subject line that the Defendants knew would be likely to mislead a recipient, acting
18
reasonably under the circumstances, about a material fact regarding the contents or
19
subject matter of the message; (b) contained false and misleading information; (c)
20
concealed material facts; and, (d) falsified, misrepresented, or forged header
21
information. These emails were disseminated in order to encourage the Plaintiff
22
and other members of the general public to purchase the publicly traded common
23
stock of the Defendant AREN in order to create an artificial and inflated
24
marketplace for these stocks and to facilitate the divestiture of their holdings in
25
these stocks. At the commencement of this conduct, some or all of the Defendants
26
owned the vast majority of these stocks and stood to benefit almost exclusively
27
from the artificial market and price increase that resulted from this conduct.
28
-3COMPLAINT
CHRONOLOGICAL FACTUAL HISTORY OF CLAIMS
8.
From July 23, 2015 to August 20, 2015, the Plaintiff received no less
than 99 unsolicited emails from the Defendants soliciting the Plaintiff to purchase
of the common stock of Defendant AREN.
9.
On or about August 6, 2015, OTC Markets Group, a United States
financial marketplace facilitating the trading of over-the-counter securities such as
AREN, tagged AREN with a status of Caveat Emptor. Among the reasons that
OTC Markets lists for assigning this status;
Promotion/Spam without Adequate Current Information
10
11
The security is being promoted to the public, but adequate current
12
information about the company has not been made available to the
13
public. Adequate current information must be publicly available
14
during any period when a security is the subject of ongoing
15
promotional activities. At such instances, as a matter of policy, when
16
adequate current information is not made available, OTC Markets
17
Group will label the security as "Caveat Emptor." Promotional
18
activities may include spam email, unsolicited faxes or news releases,
19
whether they are published by the company or a third party.
20
21
10.
The Plaintiffs email address(es) at which he received the spams at
22
issue in this action are California email address(es). Pursuant to Cal. Bus. & Prof.
23
Code 17529.1(b);
24
25
"California e-mail address" means 1) An e-mail address furnished by
26
an electronic mail service provider that sends bills for furnishing and
27
maintaining that e-mail address to a mailing address in this state; 2)
28
-4COMPLAINT
An e-mail address ordinarily accessed from a computer located in this
state; 3) An e-mail address furnished to a resident of this state.
3
4
The address(es) at which the Plaintiff received the commercial email are
ordinarily accessed from a computer located in California; and the Plaintiff is a
resident of California.
11.
The commercial email advertisements at issue in this action are all
unsolicited because the Plaintiff did not provide direct consent to receive
advertisements from the Defendants [Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17529.1 (c), (o),
10
11
(d), (a), (1)].

12.
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants engaged in fraudulent and
12
deceptive actions by initiating (as defined by Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17529.1(i))
13
the sending of no less than 99 unlawful spams on behalf of themselves and the
14
other Defendants between July 23, 2015 and August 20, 2015, inclusive; and
15
because these emails (a) contained a subject line that the Defendants knew would
16
be likely to mislead a recipient, acting reasonably under the circumstances, about a
17
material fact regarding the contents or subject matter of the message; (b) contained
18
false and misleading information; (c) concealed material facts; and, (d) falsified,
19
misrepresented, or forged header information.
20
13.
Defendants in this action are advertisers because they are persons or
21
entities that advertise through the use of commercial e-mail advertisements (in this
22
case encouraging the purchase of common stock). Advertisers are liable for
23
advertising in the spams, even if the SPAMMERS are the one who actually hit the
24
send button. Pursuant to Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17529(k), G);
25
26
The true beneficiaries of spam are the advertisers who benefit from
27
the marketing derived from the advertisements.
28
-5COMPLAINT
There is a need to regulate the advertisers who use spam, as well as
the actual spammers, because the actual spammers can be difficult to
track down due to some return addresses that show up on the display
as "unknown" and many others being obvious fakes and they are often
located offshore.
6
7
8
14.
The Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that all the
Defendants caused the spams to be transmitted
15.
The California Legislature defined liquidated damages to be $1,000
10
per spam. 17529.5(b)(1 )(B)(ii). This figure is comparable with damages in other
11
areas of consumer protection law, e.g., $500-$1,500 statutory damages per junk
12
fax, 47 U.S.C. 227(b)(3). The Plaintiffs rightful and lawful assertion of the
13
California Legislature's liquidated damages amount of $1,000 per email is
14
necessary to further the Legislature's objective of protecting California residents
15
from unlawful spam.
16
17
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against the Defendants as follows:
18
(a)
for a preliminary and permanent injunction against all defendants;
19
(b)
Liquidated damages in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000)
20
for each of at least 99 spam emails soliciting the purchase of AREN stock, as
21
authorized by Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17529.5(b)(l)(B)(ii), totaling $99,000
22
jointly and severally against all Defendants
23
(c)
for cost of suit herein incurred;
24
(d)
for such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.
25
26
///
27
///
28
///
-6COMPLAINT
Dated: August 20, 2015
By:
George Sharp, In Propria Persona
2
3
4
5
_________________________________
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-7COMPLAINT

Lawsuit Filed Against American Resource Exploration (AREN) For Violations of Spam Email Statute

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lawsuit Filed Against American Resource Exploration (AREN) For Violations of Spam Email Statute

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lawsuit Filed Against American Resource Exploration (AREN) For Violations of Spam Email Statute

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, CENTRAL DIVISION

COMES NOW PLAINTIFF AND ALLEGES AS FOLLOWS:

1. At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiff Sharp, SHARP was a resident

of San Diego County, California. SHARP has become recognized internationally

pyramid schemes as a way to relieve innocent victims most susceptible to get-rich-

SHARP owns and at all times mentioned, owned a computer with an

Service Provider, whose equipment is located in the State of California.

Defendant America Resources Exploration, Inc. (AREN), is a

publicly traded Nevada Corporation, trading on the Over-the-Counter market under

Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names of defendants sued herein as

each DOE defendant

Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on such information and belief

consent, permission and/or authorization of each and every remaining defendant.

Jurisdiction is appropriate in this court as the Defendants maintained

continuous and systematic contact with the State of California by disseminating

Plaintiff is informed and believes that the Defendants participated

and/or conspired in a scheme to disseminate spam emails which: (a) contained a

concealed material facts; and, (d) falsified, misrepresented, or forged header

information. These emails were disseminated in order to encourage the Plaintiff

stock of the Defendant AREN in order to create an artificial and inflated

CHRONOLOGICAL FACTUAL HISTORY OF CLAIMS

of the common stock of Defendant AREN.

On or about August 6, 2015, OTC Markets Group, a United States

financial marketplace facilitating the trading of over-the-counter securities such as

OTC Markets lists for assigning this status;

Promotion/Spam without Adequate Current Information

The security is being promoted to the public, but adequate current

public. Adequate current information must be publicly available

during any period when a security is the subject of ongoing

promotional activities. At such instances, as a matter of policy, when

adequate current information is not made available, OTC Markets

Group will label the security as "Caveat Emptor." Promotional

activities may include spam email, unsolicited faxes or news releases,

whether they are published by the company or a third party.

The Plaintiffs email address(es) at which he received the spams at

"California e-mail address" means 1) An e-mail address furnished by

maintaining that e-mail address to a mailing address in this state; 2)

An e-mail address ordinarily accessed from a computer located in this

state; 3) An e-mail address furnished to a resident of this state.

ordinarily accessed from a computer located in California; and the Plaintiff is a

The commercial email advertisements at issue in this action are all

(d), (a), (1)].

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants engaged in fraudulent and

be likely to mislead a recipient, acting reasonably under the circumstances, about a

misrepresented, or forged header information.

Defendants in this action are advertisers because they are persons or

the marketing derived from the advertisements.

There is a need to regulate the advertisers who use spam, as well as

the actual spammers, because the actual spammers can be difficult to

Defendants caused the spams to be transmitted

The California Legislature defined liquidated damages to be $1,000

California Legislature's liquidated damages amount of $1,000 per email is

necessary to further the Legislature's objective of protecting California residents

from unlawful spam.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against the Defendants as follows:

for a preliminary and permanent injunction against all defendants;

Liquidated damages in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000)