First Amended Complaint - 1
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
Daniel F. Blackert, (SBN 255021)blackertesq@yahoo.comLisa J. Borodkin, (SBN 196412)lisa_borodkin@post.harvard.eduASIA ECONOMIC INSTITUTE, LLC11766 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 260Los Angeles, CA 90025Telephone (310) 806-3000Facsimile (310) 826-4448Attorneys for PlaintiffsAsia Economic Institute, LLC,Raymond Mobrez, andIliana LlanerasUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTCENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIAASIA ECONOMICINSTITUTE, LLC, a CaliforniaLLC; RAYMOND MOBREZ anindividual; and ILIANALLANERAS, an individual,Plaintiffs,vs.XCENTRIC VENTURES, LLC,an Arizona LLC, doing businessas BADBUSINESS BUREAU,RIPOFF REPORT, andRIPOFFREPORT.COM,BAD BUSINESS BUREAU,LLC, organized and existingunder the laws of St. Kitts andNevis, West Indies; EDWARDMAGEDSON an individual, alsoknown as EDWARDMAGIDSON also known as the“Editor,” and DOES 1 through100, inclusive,Defendants.)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) Case No.: 2:10-cv-01360-SVW-PJW
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR:(1)
VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) --CIVIL RICO(2)
VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) --RICO CONSPIRACY(3)
UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES --CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE § 17200
et seq.
(4)
DEFAMATION(5)
DEFAMATION PER SE(6)
INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCEWITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMICRELATIONS(7)
NEGLIGENT INTERFERENCEWITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMICRELATIONS(8)
NEGLIGENT INTERFERENCEWITH ECONOMIC RELATIONS(9)
DECEIT(10)
FRAUD(11)
INJUNCTIONJURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Case 2:10-cv-01360-SVW-PJW Document 96 Filed 07/27/10 Page 1 of 84 Page ID #:2322
First Amended Complaint - 2
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
Plaintiffs Asia Economic Institute, LLC (“Asia Economic Institute” or“AEI”), Raymond Mobrez (“Mobrez”) and Iliana Llaneras (“Llaneras”)(collectively, “Plaintiffs”) complain of defendants Xcentric Ventures, LLC doingbusiness as Ripoff Report, Bad Business Bureau, RipoffReport.com andBadbusinessBureau.com (“Xcentric”), Bad Business Bureau LLC (“Bad BusinessBureau”) and Edward Magedson, also known as Ed Magedson, also known asEdward Magidson, also known as “the EDitor” (“Magedson”) (collectively,“Defendants”), and alleges as follows:
I.JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2.
This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this action underfederal question jurisdiction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and (d) (the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)(“RICO”), in that federal questions are alleged under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and (d).Thus far, this Court has exercised supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ statelaw claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.3.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over all Defendants pursuant tothe RICO statute. Specifically 18 U.S.C. § 1965(a) and (d), which confersnationwide service of process authority upon this Court. In addition, this Court haspersonal jurisdiction over all Defendants because they have sufficient contacts withthis judicial district and California to satisfy the “minimum contacts” doctrinearticulated in
International Shoe Co. v. Washington
, 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945).Defendants (a) direct conduct at Plaintiffs, who maintain principal places of business in, and are domiciled in, this judicial district; and (b) operate acommercial, interactive website in this judicial district.4.
Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391because a substantial part of the events, acts and omissions giving rise to Plaintiffs’claims occurred within this judicial district, and is also proper under 18 U.S.C. §
Case 2:10-cv-01360-SVW-PJW Document 96 Filed 07/27/10 Page 2 of 84 Page ID #:2323
First Amended Complaint - 3
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
1965(a) and (d) because all Defendants have transacted and presently transact theiraffairs in this judicial district.5.
Defendants have previously consented to and waived objections tothis Court’s jurisdiction and to venue within this judicial district.
II.THE PARTIES
6.
Plaintiff Asia Economic Institute is a limited liability company and, atall times relevant hereto, organized and existing pursuant to the laws of the State of California, and is authorized to do business in the State of California. Plaintiff AsiaEconomic Institute has its principal place of business at 11766 Wilshire Boulevard,Suite 260, Los Angeles, California 90025.7.
Plaintiff Mobrez is an individual and, at all times relevant hereto, aresident of Los Angeles, California, County of Los Angeles. Plaintiff Mobrez is aprincipal and manager of Asia Economic Institute, LLC. In addition, as aCalifornia-licensed broker, Mr. Mobrez derives a significant amount of revenuefrom brokering commercial real estate transactions.8.
Plaintiff Llaneras is an individual and, at all times relevant hereto, aresident of California, County of Los Angeles. Plaintiff Llaneras is a principal andmanager of Asia Economic Institute, LLC. In addition, as a California-licensedbroker, Ms. Llaneras derives a significant amount of revenue from brokeringcommercial real estate transactions.9.
Defendant Xcentric is a limited liability company organized andexisting pursuant to the laws of the State of Arizona with its purported domesticaddress as P.O. Box 470, Phoenix, Arizona 85280. Plaintiffs are informed andbelieve and thereon allege that Xcentric is owned by a single member, CreativeBusiness Investment Concepts, Inc., a Nevada corporation located at 2533 NorthCarson Street, Carson City, Nevada 89706. Defendant Xcentric transacts businessin interstate commerce as, inter alia, “Ripoff Report,” an enterprise, located in this
Case 2:10-cv-01360-SVW-PJW Document 96 Filed 07/27/10 Page 3 of 84 Page ID #:2324
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
57. Attempts to print a Rip-off Report directly from a standard web for AEI v Xcentric First Amended Complaint
11.3K
Reads
9
Readcasts
7
Embed Views
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
