You are on page 1of 165

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page 1 of 165

Monday, January 04, 2016
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163

Stanley J. Caterbone, APPELLANT, Pro Se
Advanced Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
IN THE UNITED STATES THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
_______________________________________________________________________________
Lisa Michelle Lambert
:
PETITIONER
:
:
v.
:
CASE NO. 3400-2015
U.S. District Court Case No. 14-02559
:
Lynn Bissonnette, et al.,
:
RESPONDANT
:
:
Stanley J. Caterbone
:
APPELLANT
:

SUBMISSION AS EXHIBIT BY APPELANT
EXHIBIT re “Advanced Media Group and Stan J. Caterbone Legal Document re Tolling
the Statute of Limitations for ALL Claims - Do I Have a Rico Claim Authored on July 9,
2006 ”
_______________________________________________________________________
I hereby on this 4th day of January, 2016, submit for considerations in the above captioned
case the attached document as an EXHIBIT to be considered by the court in the deliberations of this
case.
In Lower Court Case No. 14-02559, the MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT, which is the ORDER
appealed for this case, filed on September 2, 2015 the APPELLANT has requested from this court
the following: “In addition the MOVANT must be restored to whole by administering
SUMMARY JUDGEMENTS in cases 05-2288; 06-4650; and all other cases filed by the
MOVANT in this court. SUMMARY JUDGEMENTS must also be administered in Case No. 0813373 in the Lancaster Court of Common Pleas, and other cases filed by the MOVANT in
that said court.”
This EXHBIT titled “ Advanced Media Group and Stan J. Caterbone Legal Document re Tolling
the Statute of Limitations for ALL Claims - Do I Have a Rico Claim Authored on July 9, 2006”
directly and sufficiently addresses the question of the statute of limitations of all of the APPELLANT'S
claims for redress and financial considerations in both state and federal courts.

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page 2 of 165

Monday, January 04, 2016

The APPELLANT does not intend to overburden the Court with unnecessary filings, however
this burden of supporting the claims and statements falls on the shoulders of all those in the
government that ignored the APPELLANT'S pleas for help to resolve these issues dating back to the
days immediately following the meeting with International Signal & Control, Plc., (ISC) Executive
Larry Resch on June 23, 1987.

This information could explain the COINTELPRO attributes of the APPELLANT'S situation and
persons under oath of law must refer this to the U.S. Attorney's Office and provide me with relief.

/S/ Stanley J. Caterbone
Date: January 4, 2016

Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se Appellant
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
(717)-669-2163
http://www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com/__

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 33 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
infor@amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
717.731.8184 Phone
717.427-1621 Fax

Stan Caterbone
Advanced Media Group
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 17516
July 9, 2006

DO I HAVE A RICO CLAIM?
This is by far the most common question that I receive at www.Ricoact.com . There is no simple
answer to this question because the answer depends upon the unique facts of each case.
I have found, however, that a large percentage of potential RICO claims are undermined by the
following considerations:
?? A RICO claim cannot exist in the absence of criminal activity. The simplest way to

put this concept is: no crime - no RICO violation. This rule applies even in the context of
civil RICO claims. Every RICO claim must be based upon a violation of one of the crimes
listed in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1). The RICO Act refers to such criminal activity as
racketeering activity. RICO claims cannot be based upon breach of contract, broken
promises, negligence, defective product design, failed business transactions, or any
number of other factual scenarios that may give rise to other claims under the common
law. This being said, a RICO claim can be based upon violations of the criminal mail and
wire fraud statutes. The mail and wire fraud statutes are very broad. Some creative
lawyers have succeeded in arguing that the mail and wire fraud statutes have been
violated by fact patterns that superficially appear to give rise only to claims of negligence,
breach of contract, and other actions giving rise to common law rights. If a RICO claim is
based only upon violations of the mail or wire fraud statutes, however, courts are likely to
subject the claims to stricter scrutiny. Courts look more favorably upon RICO claims
based upon true criminal behavior, such as bribery, kickbacks, extortion, obstruction of
justice, and clearly criminal schemes that are advanced by the use of the mails and
wires.

?? RICO addresses long-term, not one-shot, criminal activity. Not only must a RICO

claim be based upon criminal activity, but the criminal acts must constitute a "pattern" of
criminal activity. A single criminal act, short-term criminal conduct, or criminal actions that
bear no relationship to each other will not give rise to a RICO claim. The United States
Supreme Court has ruled that criminal actions constitute a "pattern" only if they are
related and continuous. In order to be "related," the criminal acts must involve the same
victims, have the same methods of commission, involve the same participants, or be
related in some other fashion. A pattern may be sufficiently continuous if the criminal
actions occurred over a substantial period of time or posed a threat of indefinite duration.
The former patterns are referred to as closed-ended patterns; the latter patterns are
1
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 1 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert
Appeal
re RICO
Act
referred
to as
open-ended

Page
44 of
of 165
165 even if you have been
Monday,
patterns. Page
Accordingly,
injuredJanuary
by a 04, 2016
criminal act, you will not have a RICO claim unless that criminal act is part of a larger
pattern of criminal activity.

?? Your claim may be barred by the statute of limitations if you discovered or

reasonably should have discovered your injury four or more years ago. Many
people are mistaken that civil RICO claims are not subject to a statute of limitations. True,
Congress failed to include a statute of limitations when it passed the RICO Act, but the
United States Supreme Court has remedied that oversight and imposed a four-year
statute of limitations on all civil RICO claims. Civil Rico's statute of limitations begins to
run when the victim discovers or reasonably should have discovered its injury. Many
people also believe that the statute of limitations is reset every time a new criminal act is
committed - this is not true. Once a victim is aware or should be aware of its injury, the
victim has four years to discover the remaining elements of its claim and bring suit. A
victim cannot sit on its rights and refrain from filing suit in the face of known injuries. That
being said, however, there are several equitable doctrines that may toll or suspend the
running of the statute of limitations. If a defendant fraudulently conceals facts that are
essential to the victim's ability to purse its rights, the running of the statute of limitations
may be tolled. In addition, acts of duress, such as "if you sue me, I'll kill you," may toll the
running of the statute of limitations. All tolling doctrines are based upon whether it is fair,
under the circumstances, to bar the victim's claims on the basis of the running of the
statute of limitations. Also, if a defendant engages in a new pattern of rackeeting, that
causes new and independent injuries, a new limitations period may apply to those new
and independent injuries.
Of course, these are merely general considerations. Consult with an attorney to determine whether the
facts of your particular case give rise to a RICO claim.

2
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 2 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 55 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STANLEY J. CATERBONE,
Plaintiff
v.

No. 05-CV-2288

LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON,
MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT,
DEMANDED
STONE HARBOR POLICE DEPARTMENT,
AVALON POLICE DEPARTMENT,
COMMONWEALTH NATIONAL BANK (LC. MELLON BANK),
SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT,
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT,
FULTON BANK
Defendant

JURY TRIAL

PLAINTIFF’S REPLY TO FULTON BANK’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR EX PARTE MEETING WITH THE HONORABLE MARY A. McLAUGHLIN

FULTON BANK RESPONSE

Defendant, Fulton Bank, by and through its attorneys, Barley Snyder, LLC, hereby files the
following Response in opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Ex Parte Meeting with the Honorable
Mary A. McLaughlin: On or about June 2,2006, Plaintiff filed a Motion requesting an ex parte
meeting with the Honorable Mary A. McLaughlin "to discuss the problems of preceding, this
action without obstruction of justice; and to amend the original complaint as discussed
previously." See Plaintiffs Motion. However, Plaintiff provides no justification whatsoever for
his request for an ex parte meeting with the Court. Rather, Plaintiff apparently labors under
the false assumption that by proceeding pro se he is absolved of all responsibility to comply
with the rules. Such is not the case. The fact that Plaintiff decided to be his own lawyer does
not excuse him from following the rules of civil procedure or entitle him to any particular

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 3 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 66 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

advantage for lack of legal training. "The right of self-representation is not a license to abuse
the dignity of the courtroom. Neither is it a license not to comply with relevant rules of
procedural and substantive law." Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806,834 n. 46,95 S.Ct.
2525,2541 n. 46,45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975).

In the instant case, Plaintiff has no greater right to be heard than he would have if he were
represented by counsel. As a pro se litigant, Plaintiff, in essence, stands in the place of an
attorney. Plaintiffs request for an ex parte meeting with the Court in this case violates Rule
3.5(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct because it is clear that Plaintiff seeks to influence
the Court with his version of events, without providing defense counsel any opportunity to
respond.' Since an ex parte meeting with the Court would violate the Rules of Professional
Conduct and provide Plaintiff an unfair advantage over Defendants, Plaintiffs request for
such a meeting should be refused.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The following is copy of an Affidavit that was filed on January 31, 1998 in the chambers of
Honorable Stewart Dalzell in a desperate attempt for due process of the issues contained
herein. In November of 1997 the PLAINTIFF sought the counsel of Ms. Christina Rainville
while employed by the firm of Schnader, Harrison, Segal and Lewis. This was the last
attempt by the PLAINTIFF of seeking competent legal counsel. Ms. Rainville acknowledged
and communicated to the PLAINTIFF that the firm had barred her from representing any
additional clients from Lancaster County shortly after the PLAINTIFF’s solicitation; which she
had plenty of solicitations from other potential Lancaster County clients. In the document
titled “Plaintiff Finding of Facts” it is clearly documented that the PLAINTIFF did attempt to
solicit and retain several competent lawyers since 1987, all of who displayed conflicts of
interests, and some went so far as to violate rules of ethics concerning client/attorney
privilege. PLAINTIFF’s filing as Pro Se Litigant was the only alternative available that would
protect and preserve the PLAINTIFF’s legal standing and right to due process. The following
excerpt from the Affidavit will demonstrate to the court a factual account of the events that
precluded and provided the Plaintiff the legal standing to file the original complaint on May
16, 2005.

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 2
Page 4 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 77 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

AFFIDAVIT OF 1998 TO HONORABLE JUDGE STEWART DALZELL

“I, Stanley J. Caterbone being duly sworn according to law, make the following affidavit
concerning the years during which I was maliciously and purposefully mentally abused,
subjected to a massive array of prosecutorial misconduct, while enduring an exhaustive
fight for the sovereignty of my constitutional rights, shareholder rights, civil liberties, and
right of due access to the law. I will detail a deliberate attempt on my life, in 1991, exhibiting
the dire consequences of this complaint. These allegations are substantiated through a
preponderance of evidence including but not limited to over 10,000 documents, over 50
hours of recorded conversations, transcripts, and archived on several digital mediums. A
“Findings of Facts” is attached herewith providing merits and the facts pertaining to this
affidavit.

These issues and incidents identified herein have attempted to conceal my

disclosures of International Signal & Control, Plc. However, the merits of the violations
contained in this affidavit will be proven incidental to the existence of any conspiracy.

The plaintiff protests the courts for all remedial actions mandated by law.

Financial

considerations would exceed $1 million.

These violations began on June 23, 1987 while I was a resident and business owner in
Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and have continued to the present. These issues are a
direct consequence of my public disclosure of fraud within International Signal & Control,
Plc., of County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, which were in compliance with federal and state
statutes governing my shareholder rights granted in 1983, when I purchased my interests in
International Signal & Control., Plc.. I will also prove intentional undo influence against
family and friends towards compromising the credibility of myself, with malicious and selfserving accusations of “insanity”. I conclude that the courts must provide me with fair
access to the law, and most certainly, the process must void any technical
deficiencies found in this filing as being material to the conclusions. Such arrogance
by the Courts would only challenge the judicial integrity of our Constitution.”

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 3
Page 5 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 88 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

1. The activities contained herein may raise the argument of fair disclosure regarding the
scope of law pertaining to issues and activities compromising the National Security of the
United States. The Plaintiff will successfully argue that due to the criminal record of
International Signal & Control, including the illegal transfer of arms and technologies to an
end user Iraq, the laws of disclosure must be forfeited by virtue that “said activities posed
a direct compromise to the National Security of the United States”.; the plaintiff will argue
that his public allegations of misconduct within the operations of International Signal &
Control, Plc., as early as June of 1987 ;demonstrated actions were proven to protect the
National Security of the United States..

The activities of International Signal & Control,

Pls., placed American troops in harms way. The plaintiff’s actions should have taken the
American troops out of harms way causing the activities of the International Signal &
Control, Plc., to cease and desist. .

All activities contained herein have greatly compromised the National Security of the
United States, and the laws of jurist prudence must apply towards the Plaintiff’s intent and
motive of protecting the rights of his fellow citizens. Had the plaintiff been protected
under the law, and subsequently had the law enforcement community of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the County of Lancaster administer justice, United
States troops may have been taken out of harms way, as a direct result of ceasing the
operations of International Signal & Control, Plc., in as early as 1987.

2. The plaintiff will successfully prove that the following activities and the prosecutorial
misconduct were directed at intimidating the plaintiff from continuing his public
disclosures regarding illegal activities within International Signal & Control, Plc,. On June
23, 1998, International Signal & Control, Plc was negotiating for the $1.14 billion merger
with Ferranti International, of England.

Such disclosures threatened the integrity of

International Signal & Control’s organization, and Mr. James Guerin himself, ,
consequently resulting in adverse financial considerations to all parties if such disclosures
provided any reason to question the integrity of the transaction, which later became the
central criminal activity in the in The United States District Court For The Eastern District
Of Pennsylvania.

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 4
Page 6 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 99 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

3. The plaintiff will prove that undo influence was also responsible for the adverse
consequences and fabricated demise of his business enterprises and personal holdings.
The dire consequences of the plaintiff’s failed business dealings will demonstrate and
substantiate financial incentive and motive.

Defendants responsible for administering

undo influence and interference in the plaintiff’s business and commercial enterprises had
financial interests. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as a taxing authority, Lancaster
County had a great investment who’s demise would facilitate grave consequences to it’s
economic development. .

Commonwealth National Bank (Mellon) would have less

competition in the mortgage banking business and other financial services, violating the
lender liability laws. The Steinman Enterprise’s, Inc., would loose a pioneer in the
information technologies industries, and would protect the public domain from truthful
disclosure. The plaintiff will also provide significant evidence of said perpetrators violating
common laws governing intellectual property rights.

4. Given the plaintiff’s continued and obstructed right to due process of the law, beginning in
June of 1987 and continuing to the present, the plaintiff must be given fair access to the
law with the opportunity for any and all remedial actions required under the federal and
state statutes. The plaintiff will successfully argue his rights to the courts to rightfully
claim civil actions with regards to the totality of these activities, so described in the
following “Findings of Facts”, regardless of any statute of limitations. Given the plaintiff’s
genuine efforts for due process has been inherently and maliciously obstructed, the
courts must provide the opportunity for any and all remedial actions deserving to the
plaintiff.

5. Under current laws, the plaintiff’s intellectual capacity has been exploited as means of
discrediting the plaintiff’s disclosures and obstructing the plaintiff’s right to due process of
the law.

The plaintiff has always had the proper rights under federal and state laws to

enter into contract. The logic and reason towards the plaintiff’s activities and actions are
a matter of record, demonstrated in the “Findings of Facts”, contained herein..

The plaintiff will argue and successfully prove that the inherent emotional consequences
to all of the activities contained herein have resulted in Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome.

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 5
Page 7 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 10
10 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

The evidence of the stress subjected to the plaintiff, will prove to be the direct result of the
activities contained herein, rather than the exhibited behavior of any mental deficiency the
plaintiff may or may not have. The courts must provide for the proper interpretations of all
laws, irrespective of the plaintiff’s alleged intellectual capacity. The plaintiff successfully
argue that his “mental capacity” is of very little legal consequence, if any; other than in it’s
malicious representations used to diminish the credibility of the plaintiff.

6. The plaintiff will demonstrate that the following incidents of illegal prosecutions were
purposefully directed at intimidating the plaintiff from further public disclosure into the
activities of International Signal & Control, Plc., consequently obstructing the plaintiff’s
access to due process of the law. Due to the fact that these activities to which the
plaintiff’s perpetrators were protecting were illegal activities, the RICO statutes would
apply.

To this day, the plaintiff has never been convicted of any crime with the exception of 2
speeding tickets. The following report identifies 34 instances of prosecutorial misconduct
during the prosecutions and activities beginning on June 23, 1987 and continuing to
today.

7) Given the preponderance of evidence associated with this affidavit, the courts must
conclude that In The United States District Court For The Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, Federal Judge Stuart Dalzall’s findings of April 14, 1997, in the Lisa
Lambert case identifying acts of Prosecutorial Misconduct, now, by virtue of this affidavit,
now discloses evidence of a bona fide pattern of prosecutorial misconduct, in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and in the County of Lancaster. Criminal law must now
determine if these disclosures would warrant investigations of a possible criminal
enterprise. This affidavit is of material interest to the Lambert case, for the very fact that
this affidavit compromises the very same integrity of the court, which would tip the scales
of justice even further from the peoples deserving rights..

In the truthfulness of this affidavit, The Commonwealth must concede Lisa Michelle
Lambert to balance the scales of justice, which no other act could accomplish. The

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 6
Page 8 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 11
11 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Commonwealth must yield the criminal culpability of Lisa Michelle Lambert to the superior
matter of restoring the integrity to the courts; by it’s own admission of wrongdoing,
assuring the peoples of it’s commitment to administer equalities of justice, not inequalities
of justice. Balancing the scales of justice. Anything less, would take the full scope of
jurisdiction out of the boundaries of our laws, negating our democracy and impugning the
Constitution of the United States. The plaintiff must be restored to whole.”

I was not defending the criminal culpability of Lisa Michelle Lambert, but rather assaulting
the judicial integrity of the Lancaster County Judicial System, from first-hand experience;
and making the point that such conduct eludes every major stakeholder from the truth
and justice – prosecution and defense alike.

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 7
Page 9 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 12
12 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

PLAINTIFF’S REPLY
PLAINTIFF filed the original complaint on May 16, 2005 prematurely due to the undo
influence and intimidation of several DEFENDANTS’ and other persons, entities, and or
organizations; specifically the threat of a fabricated criminal prosecution. PLAINTIFF readily
recognized the deficiencies in the filing and the lack of a formal complaint (affidavit and
finding of facts only), and had repeatedly requested information and procedural guidance
from the Court during the course of time that had elapsed until the ORDER of the Honor on
January 7, 2006. This had seemed especially difficult in light of the fact that the original filing
was sealed. In 1998 PLAINTIFF stated to the courts the following: “I conclude that the
courts must provide me with fair access to the law, and most certainly, the process
must void any technical deficiencies found in this filing as being material to the
conclusions. Such arrogance by the Courts would only challenge the judicial integrity
of our Constitution”. PLAINTIFF acknowledges that the preceding statement contains an
emotional response to the situation, and readily requests that the Court interprets the legal
intention and merits of the PLAINTIFF’s request for a fair and reasonable access to the Court
to hear and adjudicate the PLAINTIFF’s complaint.

PLAINTIFF has filed numerous formal complaints with the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s
Internet Crime Complaint Center.
I05120804514805; and

Those complaints identified as; I05120608348825 ;

I06010506177009.

Additionally complaints were filed with the

Southern Regional Police Department of Conestoga, and the Lancaster County District
Attorney’s Office with Chief Detective Michael J. Landis during the course of the last 2 years,
where the PLAINTIFF’S computer and online broadband connections was hacked. At times
when PLAINTIFF attempted to search and find Rules of Civil Procedure (Federal and
Pennsylvania) and related subject matters, including but not limited to the effective service
for DEFENDANTS, certain provisions were missing and or replaced with erroneous and
misinformation, thus resulting in an improper Certificate of Service and violation of the Rules
of Civil Procedure relating to the Service of the complaint.

Plaintiff deliberately provided no response to all previous Motions to Dismiss filed by several
DEFENDANTS due to the vagueness of the ORDER of January 7, 2006 instructing the
PLAINTIFF to only serve all DEFENDANTS with the complaint. That ORDER stated: “IT IS

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 8
Page 10 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 13
13 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

HEREBY ORDERED that the plaintiff shall serve the summons and complaint on or
before January 25, 2006. If the plaintiff does not do so, the Court will dismiss the
complaint without prejudice. The Court will consider the plaintiff's request to amend
the complaint and for a hearing after the summons and complaint are served”.

The court provided not instructions or demands of the PLAINTIFF to proceed with any
additional motions, responses, and or replies after the effectively serving the original
complaint to all of the DEFENDANTS. PLAINTIFF will argue that continuing with litigating
the original complaint bears no purpose, nor serves any interests of the Court in providing
the PLAINTIFF with due process and access to the Courts due to the fact that the original
complaint was not appropriately formulated to ensure that the PLAINTIFF’S allegations of
misconduct and violations of Federal Law were constructed sufficiently for the Court.
PLAINTIFF, on June 2, 2006, appropriately and formally requested that meeting with the
Court to amend the original complaint in the “Motion for Ex Parte Meeting with the Honorable
Mary A. McLaughlin”.

PLAINTIFF seeks no advantage, special treatment, nor special considerations from the
Court. PLAINTIFF is seeking the ex parte meeting for procedural guidance to amend the
original complaint and to address the ramifications of the sealing of the complaint with
special regards to issues of National Security and documented and factual threats on the
PLAINTIFF’s life . The following is the excerpt from the PLAINTIFF’s Finding of Facts:
“June 11, 1991 - Stan Caterbone left the Stone Harbor Marina at approximately 12:30 am en route to
Lancaster, Pa, to retrieve some files concerning the ISC cover-up. Upon driving north on Route 47
(the normal route to Lancaster), approximately 10 miles outside the Cape May county Courthouse,
Stan Caterbone noticed a car following him closely. Suspicious, Stan Caterbone decreased his speed
from 55 mph to 35 mph, in order for the car to pass him. However, the car remained directly behind,
adjusting the speed accordingly. In an effort to elude the car, without raising suspicion, Stan
Caterbone gradually increased his speed, while also increasing the distance between the cars,
resulting in the loss of his taillights to the ensuing vehicle - Because of the winding road, Stan
Caterbone looked for an abrupt turn-off, in hopes of dashing the eluding vehicle, by loosing sight of

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 9
Page 11 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 14
14 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

his taillights. There was little or no traffic on the route during the early morning hours, and Stan
Caterbone stopped at an intersection, and noticed that the headlights of the ensuing vehicle were not
visible in his rear view mirror, meaning that his taillights were also not visible to the ensuing vehicle.
Immediately upon pulling from the intersection, Stan Caterbone noticed a narrow dirt road that lead
into a field of small trees, the perfect place to sit for the ensuing auto to pass him, unnoticed. The
ensuing vehicle pulled to the intersection, and continued north on route 47, in the direction of
Lancaster. Stan Caterbone sat in his vehicle a few minutes, until continuing on his travel, north on
Route 47. Approximately five (5) minutes later, a car traveling in excess of SS mph, approached Stan
Caterbone, traveling south on the same road (2 lanes) As the two cars approached each other, and
approximately 30 yards from reaching each other, the approaching vehicle drove directly into the lane
of Stan Caterbone, with its high beams on, and continued straight for his vehicle, or what appeared to
be a head-on-collision. Stan Caterbone drove off of the berm of the road, missing a line of trees by
less than 12 inches (eluding a life threatening disaster), and passed the vehicle that was still in the
northbound lane, heading south. Stan Caterbone, shaking and sweating furiously, noticed the cars
brake lights go on, and the car apparently turned around, and began pursuing Stan Caterbone again.
Stan Caterbone drove as fast as he could to Route 55, hoping to find traffic in order to hide and loose
the pursuing car. Stan Caterbone arrived in Lancaster, at approximately 3:00 am, and again noticed a
car sitting in the parking lot of the vacant "Sportsman's Den", at the intersection of the New Danville
Pike and Prince Streets. Upon driving west on Hershey Avenue, Stan Caterbone noticed the car
following him. In an effort to identify the license plate, Stan Caterbone made a few turns in the area of
Hamilton Watch, and followed the car heading north on S. West End Avenue. The car was a late
model, gold or tan, Cougar or possibly a Buick Park Avenue. Stan Caterbone watched the car
increase his speed, and finally changed directions and proceeded to his residence, and parked a few
blocks away, and walked through the woods, to his apartment in the Hershey Heritage complex. Stan
Caterbone then used a flashlight, in order not to reveal his presence, and returned to his vehicle,
sometime in the early morning, during daylight.

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 10
Page 12 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 15
15 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Stanley J. Caterbone/Advanced Media Group respectfully requests
that Plaintiffs Motion for Ex Parte Meeting with the Honorable Mary A. McLaughlin be
affirmed.

Respectfully submitted,

Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant
Dated: June 9, 2006
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 174516
717-431-8184
717-427-1821 facsimile
amgroup01@msn.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
.

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 11
Page 13 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 16
16 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STANLEY J. CATERBONE,
Plaintiff
v.

No. 05-CV-2288

LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON,
MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT,
DEMANDED
STONE HARBOR POLICE DEPARTMENT,
AVALON POLICE DEPARTMENT,
COMMONWEALTH NATIONAL BANK (LC. MELLON BANK),
SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT,
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT,
FULTON BANK
Defendant

JURY TRIAL

ORDER

AND NOW, this - day of ,2006, upon consideration of Plaintiffs Motion for Ex Parte Meeting
with the Honorable Mary A. McLaughlin, and Fulton Bank's response thereto, it is hereby
ORDERED AND DECREED that the Motion is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

________________________________
Mary A. McLaughlin, J.

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 12
Page 14 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 17
17 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Reply to Response to
Motion for Ex Parte Meeting has been served this 12th day of June, 2006, by first class mail,
Postage prepaid, upon:

Michael Donahue
Harbor Police Administration Building
9508 2nd Avenue
Stone Harbor. NJ 08247
Stephen Basse, Esquire
817 East Landis Avenue
Vineland, NJ 08360

Stuart A. Weiss, Esquire
George M. Gowen, 111, Esquire
Cozen O'Connor
1900 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 1 9103

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Reply to Response to
Motion for Ex Parte Meeting has been served in person to the offices below on this 12th day
of June ,2006,:
Howard L. Kelin, Esquire
Kegel, Kelin, Almy & Grimm
24 North Lime Street
Lancaster, PA 17602

George T. Brubaker, Esquire
Hartman, Underhill & Brubaker, LLP
221 East Chestnut Street
Lancaster, PA 17602

Sfephanie Carfley, Esquire
Attorneys for Defendant Fulton Bank
126 East King Street
Lancaster, PA 17602-2893
(717) 299-5201

Respectfully submitted,

Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant
Dated: June 9, 2006
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 174516
717-431-8184
717-427-1821 facsimile
amgroup01@msn.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com

Confidential
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 13
Page 15 of 112

6/12/2006
July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 18
18 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 16 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 19
19 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

F i n a c i a l Management Group, LTD.
1755 Oregon Pike
L a m a s t e r , PG
17601
(717) 569-5555
Robert Kauffman, P r e s i d e n t
Mickel N. mrtlett, E x e c u t i v e V i c e P r e s i d e n t
P. Alan Loss, Board of Directors
R o b e r t Long, Board of D i r e c t o r s
P e t e r Peneros, Broker

.

._-.
-

Defamation of C h a r a c t e r
Slander
Mental Duress
Malice
Unfair C a T p e t i t i o n
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e with BusiRelations
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e m w i t h C o n t r a c t s
Trezpass to P e r s s n
Burglary
Theft
Criminal Mischief
I n v a s i o n o f Privacy
T r e z p a s s to Personal P r o p e r t y
Undoinf l u e m
Fraud
Conspiracy
EMxzzlmnt
Breach of C o n t r a c t
Extortion
Forgery
S b r h o l d e r Freeze-cut

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 17 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

- -

Page
Page 20
20 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Cornno-lth
M t l 0 ~Bank
1
Penn m a r e
Lancaster, PA
176432

W l l o n Bank
Pittsburg, PA
Parent Carpany
Mike W o l f , Executive Vice President of Comnercial Lending
f ' w PEAJBLOS

U(;ATIONS.:
Defamation o f Character
Slander
Mental Duress

Malie
Unfair Cocrpetition
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e ~ zw i t h Business Relations
Wrongful Interference w i t h Contracts
Trespass t o Person

.

.

T M t
Criminal Mischief
Invasion o f Privacy
Trespass to Personal Property
Undoinf luenoe
Fraud
Conspiracy
EntEzzlement
Breach of Contract
Extortion

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 18 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 21
21 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Ckce Smith, Execxltive Vice President
Pete Wolfson, Sal-n

Defamation of Character
Slander
Mental IXlress
Malice
Unfair Conpetition
Wrowful Interference with BusiRelatiom
Wrowful Interference w i t h Contracts
T r e s p a s to Person

.

-

Theft
C r i m i m l Mischief
Invasion of Privacy
Trespass to Personal Property
Urdoinf luence
Fraud
? Corqsiracy
I EmSezzlement
Breach of Contract
Extortion

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 19 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 22
22 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Farrcers F1-t Bank
L l t r t z , PA 17512

.

Pete Richter, Pkrmger of La-ter
Glenn Nelsn, President

.

Shcpping Center Branch

r/Aw ,455

PLLE%~.ICNS:
Defamation of Character
Slaoder
Mental Duress
Mall03
Unfalr Corrpetr t i o n
Wrongful Interference w l t h BusiRelations
Wrongful Interference w l t h Contracts
T r e z p a s t o Pemn

,ary
.

- .

Theft
Invaslon of Prlvacy
Trespass t o Perzonal
Undolnfluence
Fraud
Cor?zplracy
Breach of Contract
t Extortion

Property

C'

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 20 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
/

-

Hunllton Bank
Oregon Plke
Lamaster, PA

Page
Page 23
23 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

17601

Chris Izzo, Loan Officer
Corestates, Credit Card M n i n i s t r a t o r

.

Defamation of Character
Slander
Mental Duress
Malice
Unfair Conpetit i o n
Wrongful Interference with Business Relations
Wrongful Interference with Contracts
Trt o Person
Trto Personal Prcperty
Undoinf luence
Fraud
Coqiracy
Breach of Contract
Extortion

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 21 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

.

Page
Page 24
24 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

F u l t o n Bank

O l d Hickory B r a n c h
Stor L a n c a s t e r . PA
17601

?6tl

U n f a i r Conpeti t i o n
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h B u s i n e s s R e l a t i o m
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e with Contracts
Undoinfluem
Fraud
Comiracy
Erkezzlement
B r e a c h of C o n t r a c t
Extortion

Cor
Brc

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 22 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 25
25 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Berdett T m l l n Hospital
Cape Nay County Courthouse
Stone Harbor, NJ
08247

Social Worker
Psychiatrist 1
Psychiatrist 2

WEGAT IONS:
Defamation of Character
Slarder
k n t a l Duress

Malice

-

Unfalr Carpetrtlon
Wrongful Interferew l t h Busines Relatiow
Wrongful Interference w i t h Contracts
Tnzspass to Person
Irwa~lon
of Prrvacy
Trespass to Percsml Property
Undolnf luence
Fraud
Cowpiracy
Breach of Contract
~orgsry
Neg11gsnce

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 23 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 26
26 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Avalon Police DeparWnt
Avalon, NJ
08247

!

Officer Dean
Fat Aswrciate

.

Defamation of Character
Slander
Mental Duress
Malice
Unfair Conpetition
Wrongful Interference with Business Relations
Wrongful Interference with Contracts
Trespass to Percan
Burglary
Theft
Criminal M i x h i e f
Itwasion o f Privacy
Trto Personal Property
Undoinf l u e n z
Fraud
Conspiracy
En'&ezzlmnt
Breach of Contract
Extortion
Forsew
Sharholder Freeze-out
mligence

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 24 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 27
27 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

k n h i m Towrship P o l i c e Deparbnent
C i r c l e Drive
Lancaster, PA
17601
D e t e c t i v e Mathias
Officer 1
Officer 2
Officer 3
Officer 4

Defamation of C h a r a c t e r
Slander
k n t a l hresr
Malice

-

'j

Wrongful I n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h Business R e l a t i o n s
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e with Contracts
T r e s p a s s to Person
8urglat-y
Theft
C r i m i n a l Mischief
Invasion of Privacy
T r e s p a s s to Personal P r o p e r t y
Undoinf l u e m
Conspiracy
Breach of C o n t r a c t
Negligznce

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 25 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 28
28 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

L a n e a s t e r P o l l c e Department
W. Chestrwt S t r e e t
L a n e a s t e r , PA
17602

Defamation of C h a r a c t e r
Slander
Mental DuMalioe
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h B u s i n e s s R e l a t i o w
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h C o n t r a c t s
Trto Person
Undoinfluence
Fraud
Conspiracy
Breach of C o n t r a c t
Negligence

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 26 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 29
29 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Jocsh R c d a , E s q .
301 C l p k r Building

36 E. K i y Street
L a m a s t e r , PA
17602
(717) 397-5791

.

Defamation of Character
Slander
k n t a l Duress
Malice
Unfair Conpeti t i o n
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e w i t h Business R e l a t i o m
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e with Contracts
Undoinfluence
Fraud
Colqriracy
Embezzlenmt
Breach of Contract
Extortion
S h a r b l d e r Freeze-cut
Neglisnce

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 27 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 30
30 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Lou S c ~ l l e r Esq.
,
V a l o r e , M c A l l i s t e r , W i x o r e l a n d , Gould, V e s p e r & Sctwartz

Northfield, NJ
(609) 64-1111

.

Mental Duress
Malice
U n f a i r Gorrpetltion
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h B u s i n e s s R e l a t i o n s
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h C o n t r a c t s
Undoinf l u e n c e
Fraud
Conspiracy
mzzlement
Breach of C o n t r a c t
Extortion
Negligence

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 28 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 31
31 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

D r . W r s h a l l L e v i r e , E ffl D P A
l a 1 T i l t o n Road
N o r t h f i e l d , NJ
(653) 646-2011

.

D e f a m t i o n of C h a r a c t e r
Slander
Mental LXlresr
Malice
Unfair C a r p e t i t i o n
Wrongful I n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h B u s i n e s s Relations
Wrongful Interference w i t h C o n t r a c t s
T r e a s s to Person
I n v a s i o n of P r i v a c y
Undoinf l u e e
Fraud
Comiracy
Fdxzzlmnt
Breach of C o n t r a c t
Extortion
Neglige-

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 29 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 32
32 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 30 of 112

July 9, 2006

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?536747398298484...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 33
33 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

A/R, CLOSED, STANDARD

United States District Court
Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv-03689-AB

IN RE: STANLEY L. CATERBONE
Assigned to: HONORABLE ANITA B. BRODY
Related Case: 2:06-cv-01538-AB
Cause: 28:0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BA

Date Filed: 07/15/2005
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 422 Bankruptcy Appeal
(801)
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Appellant
STANLEY CATERBONE

represented by STANLEY CATERBONE
220 STONE HILL ROAD
CONESTOGA, PA 19516
PRO SE

V.
Debtor-in-Possess
STANLEY CATERBONE

represented by STANLEY CATERBONE
(See above for address)
PRO SE

Trustee
UNITED STATES TRUSTEE

represented by UNITED STATES TRUSTEE
OFFICE OF THE U.S. TRUSTEE
833 CHESTNUT ST., STE. 500
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
PRO SE
KEVIN CALLAHAN
833 CHESTNUT STREET
SUITE 500
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
215-597-4411
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed
11/14/2005

#

Docket Text
7 Letter from U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT re: received original record on
11/10/05. (afm, ) (Entered: 11/14/2005)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
1 of 2

Page 31 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:32 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?536747398298484...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 34
34 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

11/07/2005

Original Bankruptcy Record returned to the Bankruptcy Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania. (afm, ) (Entered: 11/08/2005)

10/06/2005

6 ORDER THAT THIS CASE IS REINSTATED IN THE U.S.
BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT PROVIDED
THAT DEBTOR-APPELLANT COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND
REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO ALL DEBTORS SEEKING
RELIEF UNDER THE BANKRUPTCY CODE.. SIGNED BY JUDGE
ANITA B. BRODY ON 10/5/05. 10/7/05 ENTERED AND COPIES
MAILED.(afm, ) (Entered: 10/07/2005)

10/03/2005

5 RESPONSE TO THE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE
DEBTOR'S BANKRUPTCY CASE SHOULD NOT BE REINSTATED
by UNITED STATES TRUSTEE, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.
(Attachments: # 1 COS) (afm, ) (Entered: 10/03/2005)

09/23/2005

4 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE BY OCTOBER 3, 2005, WHY IN LIGHT
OF DEBTOR-APPELLANT'S NOTICE OF APPEAL (BKY. DOCKET
#12) AND BRIEF (DOCKET #3), THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE
REINSTATED IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRPUTCY COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. SIGNED BY
JUDGE ANITA B. BRODY ON 09/21/2005. 09/23/2005 ENTERED
AND COPIES VIA ECF AND U.S. MAIL.(mo, ) (Entered: 09/23/2005)

07/28/2005

3 BRIEF TO ORDER TO DISMISS ON 6/13/05 by STANLEY
CATERBONE. (afm, ) (Entered: 07/29/2005)

07/15/2005

2 Briefing Schedule 7/18/05 Entered and copies mailed. (tj, ) (Entered:
07/18/2005)

07/15/2005

1 Certificate of Appeal of STANLEY CATERBONE from the order of
Bankruptcy Judge Thomas M. Twardowski. (tj, ) (Entered: 07/18/2005)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
07/06/2006 14:31:03
PACER
Login:

am3189

Client Code:

Description:

Docket
Report

Search
Criteria:

2:05-cv-03689-AB

Cost:

0.08

Billable Pages: 1

Advanced Media Group re RICO
2 of 2

Page 32 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:32 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 35
35 of
of 165
165
Query

Advanced Media Group re RICO
1 of 1

Reports

Page 33 of 112

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/framemenu.pl
Monday, January 04, 2016
Utilities

Logout

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 36
36 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

SUSPENSE

United States District Court
Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv-02288-MAM

CATERBONE v. LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON et al
Assigned to: HONORABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN
Cause: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

Date Filed: 05/01/2005
Jury Demand: Defendant
Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
STANLEY J. CATERBONE

represented by STANLEY J. CATERBONE
220 STONE HILL ROAD
CONESTOGA, PA 17516
US
PRO SE

V.
Defendant
LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006

represented by ROBERT W. HALLINGER
APPEL & YOST LLP
33 NORTH DUKE ST
LANCASTER, PA 17602
717-394-0521
Email: rhallinger@appelyost.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE
DEPT.

represented by CHRISTOPHER S. UNDERHILL
HARTMAN UNDERHILL &
BRUBAKER LLP
221 E. CHESTNUT ST.
LANCASTER, PA 17602-2782
717-299-7254
Fax: 717-299-3160
Email: chrisu@hublaw.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant

Advanced Media Group re RICO
1 of 7

Page 34 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 37
37 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

STONE HARBOR POLICE DEPT.
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006
Defendant
AVALON POLICE EPT.
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006

represented by WALTER H. SWAYZE, III
SEGAL, MCCAMBRIDGE, SINGER
& MAHONEY
30 S. 17TH ST
STE 1700
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
215-972-8015
Email: pswayze@smsm.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
PATRICIA BAXTER
SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER &
MAHONEY, LTD.
UNITED PLAZA
30 SOUTH 17TH STREET
SUITE 1700
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
215-399-2007
Email: pbaxter@smsm.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
COMMONWEALTH NATIONAL
BANK
i.e. MELLON BANK

represented by GEORGE M. GOWEN, III
COZEN O'CONNOR
1900 MARKET STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
215-665-2000
Fax: 215-665-2013
Email: ggowen@cozen.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
STUART A. WEISS
COZEN O'CONNOR
1900 MARKET STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
215-665-2000
Email: sweiss@cozen.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant

Advanced Media Group re RICO
2 of 7

Page 35 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 38
38 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE
DEPT.
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006
Defendant
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFFS
DEPT.
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006
Defendant
represented by STEPHANIE CARFLEY
BARLEY SNYDER SENFT &
COHEN LLC
126 EAST KING ST
LANCASTER, PA 17602-2832
TEL 717-299-5201
Email: scarfley@barley.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

FULTON BANK

Date Filed

#

Docket Text

06/30/2006

36 ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO DISMISS OF LANCASTER
COUNTY PRISON IS DENIED AS MOOT. SIGNED BY JUDGE
MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN. 7/3/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED,
AND E-MAILED.(sc, ) (Entered: 07/03/2006)

06/30/2006

35 AFFIDAVIT of Howard Kelin by LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON.
(HALLINGER, ROBERT) (Entered: 06/30/2006)

06/30/2006

34 AFFIDAVIT of Vincent Guarini by LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON.
(HALLINGER, ROBERT) (Entered: 06/30/2006)

06/30/2006

33 Memorandum in Support re 32 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by
LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON. (HALLINGER, ROBERT) (Entered:
06/30/2006)

06/30/2006

32 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by LANCASTER COUNTY
PRISON.Certificate of Service.(HALLINGER, ROBERT) (Entered:
06/30/2006)

06/19/2006

31 ORDER THAT TO THE THE EXTENT THAT PLAINTIFF
REQUESTS LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT IN HIS
REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION FOR AN EX PARTE
MEETING WITH THE COURT, THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE
COMPLAINT SHALL BE CONSIDERED A MOTION TO FILE AN
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND SAID MOTION IS GRANTED.
SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 6/19/06. 6/19/06
ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered:

Advanced Media Group re RICO
3 of 7

Page 36 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 39
39 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

06/19/2006)
06/14/2006

30 REPLY to Fulton Bank's response to plff's motion for ex parte meeting
with Honorable Mary A. McLaughlin, filed by plff STANLEY J.
CATERBONE, Certificate of Service. (gn, ) (Entered: 06/15/2006)

06/13/2006

29 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS
OF MELLON BANK, MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DET AND
FULTON BANK ARE GRANTED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN A
MEMORANDUM. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PLFF'S
COMPLAINT IS ALSO DISMISSED AS TO DEFTS SOUTHERN
REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT, STONE HARBOR POLICE
DEPARTMENT, AVALON POLICE DEPT, LANCASTER COUNTY
PRISON AND LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF
TODAY'S DATE. FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PLFF'S MOTION
FOR AN EX PARTE MEETING WITH THE COURT IS DENIED AS
MOOT.. SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON
6/13/06.6/14/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.
(lvj, ) (Entered: 06/14/2006)

06/05/2006

28 RESPONSE to Motion re [26] MOTION for Ex Parte Meeting filed by
FULTON BANK, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of
Proposed Order)(CARFLEY, STEPHANIE) Modified on 6/7/2006 (np).
(Entered: 06/05/2006)

06/02/2006

27 RESPONSE in Opposition re [26] MOTION FOR AN EX PARTE
MEETING WITH THE COURT filed by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP
POLICE DEPT.. (UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER) (Entered:
06/02/2006)

06/01/2006

26 MOTION FOR A MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PROBLEMS OF
PRCEDING THIS ACTION WITHOUT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE,
FILED BY PLFF STANLEY J. CATERBONE, CERTIFICATES OF
SERVICE..(gn, ) (Entered: 06/02/2006)

04/26/2006

25 NOTICE of Appearance by WALTER H. SWAYZE, III on behalf of
AVALON POLICE EPT. with JURY DEMAND & CERTIFICATE OF
SERVICE (SWAYZE, WALTER) (Entered: 04/26/2006)

04/26/2006

24 NOTICE of Appearance by PATRICIA BAXTER on behalf of AVALON
POLICE EPT. with JURY DEMAND & CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
(BAXTER, PATRICIA) (Entered: 04/26/2006)

04/12/2006

23 ORDER THAT THE CASE SHALL BE PLACED IN CIVIL SUSPENSE
UNTIL 5/11/06. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON
4/11/06. ) 4/12/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND
E-MAILED.(gn, ) (Entered: 04/12/2006)

04/10/2006

22 NOTICE by plff STANLEY J. CATERBONE for continuance. (gn, )
(Entered: 04/10/2006)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
4 of 7

Page 37 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 40
40 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

03/06/2006

21 Request for MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution Be Granted
filed by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPT., Certificate of Service.
(UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER) Modified on 3/7/2006 (np). (Entered:
03/06/2006)

02/23/2006

20 MOTION to Dismiss filed by COMMONWEALTH NATIONAL
BANK.Memorandum, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of
Proposed Order # 2 Memorandum of Law# 3 Certificate of
Service)(WEISS, STUART) (Entered: 02/23/2006)

02/09/2006

19 ORDER THAT MOTION OF DEFT MELLON BANK FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER IS GRANTED. IT IS HEREBY
FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE DEADLINE FOR MELLON'S
RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT IS EXTENDED BY 14 DAYS. .
SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 2/9/06.2/9/06
ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED. (lvj, ) (Entered: 02/09/2006)

02/09/2006

18 BRIEF in Support re 17 MOTION to Dismiss filed by FULTON BANK,
Certificate of Service. (CARFLEY, STEPHANIE) Modified on 2/13/2006
(np). (Entered: 02/09/2006)

02/09/2006

17 MOTION to Dismiss filed by FULTON BANK.Certificate of Service.
(Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(CARFLEY, STEPHANIE)
(Entered: 02/09/2006)

02/09/2006

16 Praecipe to Enter Appearance by FULTON BANK; Jury Demand,
Certificate of Service. (CARFLEY, STEPHANIE) Modified on 2/9/2006
(np). (Entered: 02/09/2006)

02/08/2006

15 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer filed by
COMMONWEALTH NATIONAL BANK.Memorandum, Certificate of
Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order # 2 Memorandum of
Law# 3 Certificate of Service)(GOWEN, GEORGE) (Entered:
02/08/2006)

02/06/2006

14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE
DEPT. re 12 MOTION to Dismiss, 13 Memorandum of Law in Support
(UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER) (Entered: 02/06/2006)

02/06/2006

13 Memorandum of Law in Support re 12 MOTION to Dismiss by
MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPT.. (UNDERHILL,
CHRISTOPHER) (Entered: 02/06/2006)

02/06/2006

12 MOTION to Dismiss filed by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE
DEPT..Brief, Affidavit, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit
A# 2 Exhibit B)(UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER) (Entered: 02/06/2006)

02/06/2006

11 Praecipe for Entry of Appearance by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE
DEPT., Certificate of Service. (UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER)
Modified on 2/7/2006 (np). (Entered: 02/06/2006)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
5 of 7

Page 38 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 41
41 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

01/23/2006

10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Avalon Police Dept. by certified mail (
no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Lancaster County Prison by certified
mail ( no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Commonwealth National Bank (Mellon
Bank, N.A.) by certified mail (no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered:
01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Stone Harbor Police Dept. by certified
mail ( no green card attached) (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Manheim Township Police Dept. by
certified mail ( no green card attached) (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
Summons and Complaint upon deft Lancaster County Sheriffs Dept by
certified mail ( no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re
Summons and Complaint was served upon Fulton Bank by certified mail
(no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/06/2006

3 ORDER THAT THE PLFF SHALL SERVE THE SUMMONS AND
COMPLAINT ON OR BEFORE 1/25/06. IF THE PLFF DOES NOT DO
SO, THE COURT WILL DISMISS THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT
PREJUDICE. THE COURT WILL CONSIDER THE PLFF'S REQUEST
TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT AND FOR A HEARING AFTER THE
SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT ARE SERVICED. IT IS FURTHER
ORDERED THAT THE PLFF'S MOTION TO FILE THE COMPLAINT
UNDER SEAL IS DENIED. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A.
MCLAUGHLIN ON 1/5/06.) 1/9/06 ENTERED AND COPIES
MAILED. (gn, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)

05/16/2005

2 MOTION TO SEAL THE COMPLAINT, FILED BY PLFF STANLEY J.
CATERBONE.(gn, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)

05/16/2005

Advanced Media Group re RICO
6 of 7

Summons Issued as to defts' FULTON BANK, LANCASTER COUNTY
PRISON, MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPT., STONE HARBOR
POLICE DEPT., AVALON POLICE EPT., COMMONWEALTH
NATIONAL BANK, SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPT.,
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT. Forwarded To: pro se on
5/16/05 (gn, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)

Page 39 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 42
42 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

05/16/2005

1 COMPLAINT against defts' FULTON BANK, LANCASTER COUNTY
PRISON, MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPT., STONE HARBOR
POLICE DEPT., AVALON POLICE EPT., COMMONWEALTH
NATIONAL BANK, SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPT.,
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT. ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt
number 916844.), filed by plff STANLEY J. CATERBONE.(gn, )
(Entered: 01/12/2006)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
07/06/2006 14:35:36
PACER
Login:

am3189

Client Code:

Description:

Docket
Report

Search
Criteria:

2:05-cv-02288-MAM

Billable
Pages:

3

Cost:

0.24

Advanced Media Group re RICO
7 of 7

Page 40 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 43
43 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

APPEAL, FeeDue

U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Reading)
Bankruptcy Petition #: 05-23059-ref
Date Filed: 05/23/2005

Assigned to: Judge Richard E. Fehling
Chapter 11
Voluntary
Asset

represented by Stanley J. Caterbone
PRO SE

Debtor
Stanley J. Caterbone
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 17516
SSN: xxx-xx-0959
U.S. Trustee
United States Trustee
Office of the U.S. Trustee
833 Chestnut Street
Suite 500
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597-4411

Filing Date

represented by DAVE P. ADAMS
USDOJ
833 Chestnut Street
Suite 500
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597-4411
Email:
dave.p.adams@usdoj.gov

#

Docket Text

06/29/2006

66

Hearing Held - RE: Motion to Dismiss Case, or Conversion of Case to
Chapter 7 Filed by United States Trustee (related document(s),60).
**MATTER TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT ; US Trustee's Brief
due 7/21/2006, Debtor's brief due 9/1/2006*** (P., Cathy) (Entered:
06/29/2006)

06/22/2006

65

Debtor's Objection/Answer to United States Trustee's Motion to
Dismiss or Convert Case to Chapter 7 ; Answer and Exhibits Filed by
Stanley J. Caterbone ***CD Disc received with pleading contains 2
files, one of the files could not be opened and therefore unable to
attach to entry*** (related document(s)60). (Attachments: # 1
Exhibits A to E# 2 docket) (P., Cathy) (Entered: 06/23/2006)

06/08/2006

64

Certificate of Service Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone Regarding
Documents sent to US Trustee's Office. (P., Cathy) (Entered:
06/08/2006)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
1 of 9

Page 41 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 44
44 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

06/02/2006

63

BNC Certificate of Mailing. - U.S. Trustee Notice of Motion. Number
of Notices Mailed: (related document(s) (Related Doc # 61)). No. of
Notices: 33. Service Date 06/02/2006. (Admin.) (Entered:
06/03/2006)

05/30/2006

62

Certificate of Service of Motion to Convert/Dismiss and Notice Filed
by DAVE P. ADAMS on behalf of United States Trustee (related
document(s)61, 60). (ADAMS, DAVE) (Entered: 05/30/2006)

05/30/2006

61

Notice of Motion to Convert Case to Chapter 7, Motion to Dismiss
Case60 Filed by United States Trustee. Hearing scheduled for
6/29/2006 at 11:00 AM at mad - Courtroom 1, Third Floor.
(ADAMS, DAVE) (Entered: 05/30/2006)

05/30/2006

60

Motion to Convert Case to Chapter 7 . Fee Amount $15.00, Motion
to Dismiss Case Filed by United States Trustee Represented by DAVE
P. ADAMS (Counsel). (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order # 2
Proposed Order) (ADAMS, DAVE) (Entered: 05/30/2006)

05/03/2006

59

Order (copy) entered in District Court within Appeal CV-06-1538 ;
Ordered that the Appellant's motion for continuance is Denied as
Moot (continuance previously granted). (P., Cathy) (Entered:
05/23/2006)

04/14/2006

58

Copy of Notice. NOTICE: The record on appeal from the Bankruptcy
court in the above captioned case was entered on the docket in this
office on April 11, 2006 and has been assigned to the Hon. Anita B.
Brody. The following is the schedule for filing briefs with this office:
1) The appellant shall serve and file his brief within 15 days after entry
of the appeal on the docket. 2) The appellee shall serve and file his
brief within 15 days after service of the brief of the appellant. 3) The
appellant may serve and file a reply brief within 10 days after service
of the brief of the appellee. See original on case no. 06-cv-1538. (P.,
Paul) (Entered: 04/17/2006)

04/13/2006

57

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 55)). No. of Notices: 3. Service Date 04/13/2006.
(Admin.) (Entered: 04/14/2006)

04/13/2006

56

District Court Acknowledgement of receiving Bankruptcy Appeal
Signed by Deputy Clerk Steve Tomas - Civil Action #06-1538 Notice of Appeal of Order dated 2/23/2006 Granting Motion for
Relief from Stay Regarding Property 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga,
PA (related document(s)44). (P., Cathy) (Entered: 04/13/2006)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
2 of 9

Page 42 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 45
45 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

04/10/2006

55

Order DENYING Debtor's Motion to Stay All Proceedings (Request
for Continuance) because nothing is presently pending before this
Court that would be subject to being stayed (related document #53) ;
FURTHER ORDERED that any further or future motion or request to
stay proceedings filed by Debtor shall specify precisely what
proceeding or proceedings he is seeking to stay and shall forth in full
all grounds for seeking such a stay. (P., Cathy) (Entered: 04/11/2006)

04/10/2006

54

Transmission of Record on Appeal re Order dated 2/23/2006 Granting
Motion for Relief from Stay Regarding Property 220 Stone Hill Road,
Conestoga, PA to U.S. District Court (related documents 44 Notice of
Appeal, , ) (related document(s)44). (L., Eleanor) (Entered:
04/10/2006)

04/10/2006

53

Request for Continuance of Chapter 11 Case Filed by Stanley J.
Caterbone . (P., Cathy) (Entered: 04/10/2006)

04/02/2006

52

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 51)). No. of Notices: 3. Service Date 04/02/2006.
(Admin.) (Entered: 04/03/2006)

03/31/2006

51

Order DENYING Debtor's (Second) Request for Hearing because
nothing is pending before this Court on which a hearing might be held.
(related document(s)50). (P., Cathy) (Entered: 03/31/2006)

03/30/2006

50

Debtor's Request for Hearing with Bankruptcy Judge Filed by Stanley
J. Caterbone . (P., Cathy) (Entered: 03/30/2006)

03/23/2006

49

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 48)). No. of Notices: 3. Service Date 03/23/2006.
(Admin.) (Entered: 03/24/2006)

03/20/2006

48

Order DENYING Debtor's Request for Hearing because nothing is
pending before this Court on which a hearing might be held. (related
document(s)47). (P., Cathy) (Entered: 03/21/2006)

03/20/2006

47

Debtor Request for Hearing, and Certificate of Service thereto Filed
by Stanley J. Caterbone . (P., Cathy) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

03/19/2006

46

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 45)). No. of Notices: 3. Service Date 03/19/2006.
(Admin.) (Entered: 03/20/2006)

03/17/2006

45

Attach PDF Document: Copy of Debtor's Notice of Appeal - RE:
Order dated 2/23/2006 Granting Motion for Relief from Stay

Advanced Media Group re RICO
3 of 9

Page 43 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 46
46 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

Regarding Property 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, PA Filed by
Fulton Bank (related document(s)44). (P., Cathy) (Entered:
03/17/2006)
03/17/2006

44

Notice of Appeal - RE: Order dated 2/23/2006 Granting Motion for
Relief from Stay Regarding Property 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga,
PA Filed by Fulton Bank ; Notice of Appeal Filed by Stanley J.
Caterbone (related document(s)42). Appellant Designation due by
3/27/2006. Transmission of record on appeal to District Court Due
Date:4/10/2006 ; copies to Judge Richard Fehling, Shawn Long, Esq,
Unted States Trustee's Office, Debtor Stanley Caterbone. **FEE
AMOUNT $255 NOT PAID**(P., Cathy) ***Modified on 3/20/2006,
Exhibit A referenced in the notice of appeal was not included or
attached to the pleading*** (P., Cathy). (Entered: 03/17/2006)

02/25/2006

43

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 42)). No. of Notices: 4. Service Date 02/25/2006.
(Admin.) (Entered: 02/26/2006)

02/23/2006

42

Order Granting Motion for Relief from Stay Regarding Property 220
Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, PA Filed by Fulton Bank Represented by
SHAWN M. LONG (Related Doc # 31) (R., Sara) (Entered:
02/23/2006)

02/21/2006

Hearing Held on 31 Motion for Relief from Stay Filed by Fulton Bank
Represented by SHAWN M. LONG (Counsel). Matter Taken Under
Advisement. (S., Barbara) (Entered: 02/21/2006)

02/10/2006

41

Monthly Operating Report for Filing for the month of January 2006
Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone . (P., Cathy) (Entered: 02/10/2006)

02/02/2006

40

BNC Certificate of Mailing - Added Creditor Status Order. Number of
Notices Mailed: (related document(s) (Related Doc # 37)). No. of
Notices: 4. Service Date 02/02/2006. (Admin.) (Entered: 02/03/2006)

02/02/2006

39

Debtor's Response to Motion of Fulton Bank for Relief From Stay ;
Response and Exhibits thereto Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone (related
document(s)31). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-C# 2 Exhibits D-I# 3
Exhibits J-M) (P., Cathy) (Entered: 02/03/2006)

02/02/2006

38

Certificate of Service Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone - RE: Amended
Schedules (related document(s)35). (P., Cathy) (Entered: 02/02/2006)

01/31/2006

37

Order Entered that if a certificate of service of the amended schedules
or amended matrix is not filed within 20 days from the date of this

Advanced Media Group re RICO
4 of 9

Page 44 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 47
47 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

order, the case will be closed without such amendment - RE:
Amended Schedule F filed 1/30/2006. (P., Cathy) (Entered:
01/31/2006)
01/30/2006

36

Advanced Media Group Income Statements for the year 2005 Filed by
Stanley J. Caterbone . (Attachments: # 1 Continuation of Reports) (P.,
Cathy) (Entered: 01/31/2006)

01/30/2006

35

Amended Schedule F (creditor added) Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone ;
Receipt Number 20074148, Fee Amount $26.00 (P., Cathy) (Entered:
01/31/2006)

01/24/2006

33

Notice of Appearance and Request for Notice for Service of Papers,
Receipt of Notices, and Inclusion on Notice List by SHAWN M.
LONG Filed by SHAWN M. LONG on behalf of Fulton Bank.
(LONG, SHAWN) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/24/2006

32

Notice of (related document(s): 31 Motion for Relief from Stay. Fee
Amount $150,) Filed by Fulton Bank. Hearing scheduled for
2/21/2006 at 09:30 AM at mad - Courtroom 1, Third Floor. (LONG,
SHAWN) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/24/2006

Receipt of Motion for Relief From Stay(05-23059-tmt)
[motion,mrlfsty] ( 150.00) Filing Fee. Receipt number 4303314. Fee
amount 150.00. (U.S. Treasury) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/24/2006

31

Motion for Relief from Stay. Fee Amount $150, Filed by Fulton Bank
Represented by SHAWN M. LONG (Counsel). Objections due by
2/8/2006. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A and B- Note and Mortgage# 2
Proposed Order # 3 Certification of Service and Notice) (LONG,
SHAWN) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

34

Certificate of Service Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone - RE: Amended
Schedules and Response to Creditor Status Order (related
document(s)27). (P., Cathy) (Entered: 01/26/2006)

01/11/2006

30

BNC Certificate of Mailing - Added Creditor Status Order. Number of
Notices Mailed: (related document(s) (Related Doc # 29)). No. of
Notices: 24. Service Date 01/11/2006. (Admin.) (Entered:
01/12/2006)

01/09/2006

29

Order Entered that if a certificate of service of the amended schedules
or amended matrix is not filed within 20 days from the date of this
order, the case will be closed without such amendment (Regarding
amendments filed 12/15/2005) (P., Cathy) (Entered: 01/09/2006)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
5 of 9

Page 45 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 48
48 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

12/16/2005

28

Meeting of Creditors Held December 15, 2005. (ADAMS, DAVE)
(Entered: 12/16/2005)

12/15/2005

27

Amended Schedules F & G Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone ; Receipt
Number 20074028, Fee Amount $26.00. (P., Cathy) (Entered:
12/16/2005)

12/15/2005

26

Response dated 12/14/2005 Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone Regarding
HEMAP Appeal Hearing Request. (P., Cathy) (Entered: 12/16/2005)

11/29/2005

25

Letter (dated 11/3/2005) Filed by Debtor Stanley J. Caterbone
addressed to Department of Justice, US Trustee Office - RE:
Summation on reason to file under chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
(P., Cathy) (Entered: 11/29/2005)

11/29/2005

Receipt of Final Installment Payment. Receipt Number 20073978, Fee
Amount $839.00. (P., Cathy) (Entered: 11/29/2005)

11/18/2005

24

BNC Certificate of Mailing - Meeting of Creditors. Number of Notices
Mailed: (related document(s) (Related Doc # 23)). No. of Notices: 25.
Service Date 11/18/2005. (Admin.) (Entered: 11/19/2005)

11/16/2005

23

Meeting of Creditors . 341(a) meeting to be held on 12/15/2005 at
12:30 PM at 3cnfrm - 3rd Floor Conference Room. Last day to
oppose discharge or dischargeability is 2/13/2006. (E., Carol)
(Entered: 11/16/2005)

11/10/2005

22

BNC Certificate of Mailing - Hearing to Show Cause. Number of
Notices Mailed: (related document(s) (Related Doc # 20)). No. of
Notices: 18. Service Date 11/10/2005. (Admin.) (Entered:
11/11/2005)

11/10/2005

Appeal Returned from District Court - RE: Appeal Case #
05-CV-3689 regarding dismissal of case.(related document(s)12). (P.,
Cathy) (Entered: 11/10/2005)

11/09/2005

21

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 19)). No. of Notices: 27. Service Date 11/09/2005.
(Admin.) (Entered: 11/10/2005)

11/08/2005

20

Notice of Hearing to Show Cause why this case should not be
Dismissed for Debtor's Failure to Timely Pay Filing Fees for Chapter
11 Voluntary Petition in the total amount of $839.00. Show Cause
hearing to be held on 12/1/2005 at 11:00 AM at mad - Courtroom 1,
Third Floor. (P., Cathy) (Entered: 11/08/2005)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
6 of 9

Page 46 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 49
49 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

10/07/2005

18

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 17)). No. of Notices: 2. Service Date 10/07/2005.
(Admin.) (Entered: 10/08/2005)

10/05/2005

19

Final Order By District Court Judge Anita B. Brody - RE: Notice of
Appeal (CA-05-3689) Regarding 6/13/2005 Order Dismissing Case
for Debtor's Failure to Timely File Required Document ; ORDER
REINSTATING CASE TO US BANKRUPTCY COURT (related
document(s)16). (P., Cathy) (Entered: 11/07/2005)

10/05/2005

17

Attach PDF Document for BNC noticing: Copy of District Court
Order to Show Cause (related document(s)16). (P., Cathy) (Entered:
10/05/2005)

09/21/2005

16

District Court Order entered within Civil Action # 05-CV-3689 Notice
of Appeal Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone Regarding 6/13/2005 Order
Dismissing Case Re: Notice of Appeal, filed by Debtor Stanley J.
Caterbone ; The Trustee is ORDERED to show cause by 10/3/2005
why this case should not be reinstated in the US Bankruptcy Court.
(related document(s)12). (P., Cathy) (Entered: 09/30/2005)

07/19/2005

15

District Court Acknowledgement of receiving Bankruptcy Appeal.
Signed by Deputy Clerk: Steve Tomas ; Civil Action # 05-CV-3689 RE: Notice of Appeal Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone Regarding
6/13/2005 Order Dismissing Case (related document(s)12). (P.,
Cathy) (Entered: 07/19/2005)

07/12/2005

14

Transmission of Record on Appeal to U.S. District Court (related
documents 12 Notice of Appeal) (related document(s)12). (F., Anitra)
(Entered: 07/14/2005)

07/01/2005

13

Appellant Designation of Contents For Inclusion in Record On
Appeal, and Findings of Fact Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone .
(Attachments: # 1 Findings of Fact, 1983-1987# 2 Findings of Fact,
1988-2003# 3 Findings of Fact, 2004-present)(P., Cathy) (Entered:
07/01/2005)

07/01/2005

06/21/2005

Advanced Media Group re RICO
7 of 9

Receipt Number 20073451, Fee Amount $255.00 - Notice of Appeal
regarding Dismissal Order. (related document(s)12). (P., Cathy)
(Entered: 07/01/2005)
12

Notice of Appeal Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone Regarding 6/13/2005
Order Dismissing Case for Debtor's Failure to Timely File Required
Documents (related document(s)9). Appellant Designation due by
7/1/2005. Transmission of record on appeal to District Court Due

Page 47 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 50
50 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

Date:7/15/2005. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits) **$255.00 FILING FEE
NOT PAID** ; copies to Judge Thomas M. Twardowski, United
States Trustee's Office, Debtor Stanley Caterbone. (P., Cathy)
(Entered: 06/21/2005)
06/21/2005

Matrix Filed. Number of pages filed: 1, Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone .
(P., Cathy) (Entered: 06/21/2005)

06/21/2005

11

Summary of Schedules, Schedules A-J, Statement of Financial Affairs
Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone . (Attachments: # 1 Statement of
Financial Affairs# 2 Finance Statements# 3 Matrix) (P., Cathy)
(Entered: 06/21/2005)

06/15/2005

10

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 9)). No. of Notices: 12. Service Date 06/15/2005.
(Admin.) (Entered: 06/16/2005)

06/13/2005

9

Order Dismissing Case for Debtor's Failure to Timely File Required
Documents. (P., Cathy) (Entered: 06/13/2005)

06/04/2005

8

BNC Certificate of Mailing - PDF Document. (related document(s)
(Related Doc # 7)). No. of Notices: 2. Service Date 06/04/2005.
(Admin.) (Entered: 06/05/2005)

06/02/2005

7

Order Granting Application To Pay Filing Fees In Installments.
(Related Doc # 4) ; Total amount due $839.00, First Installment
Payment in the amount of $215 due by 8/1/2005, Second Installment
Payment in the amount of $215.00 due by 8/30/2005, Third
Installment Payment in the amount of $209.00 due by 9/15/2005, Final
Installment Payment in the amount of $200.00 due by 9/20/2005. (P.,
Cathy) (Entered: 06/02/2005)

05/25/2005

6

BNC Certificate of Mailing - Voluntary Petition. Number of Notices
Mailed: (related document(s) (Related Doc # 5)). No. of Notices: 2.
Service Date 05/25/2005. (Admin.) (Entered: 05/26/2005)

05/23/2005

5

Order Entered that unless the missing documents:20 Largest
Unsecured Creditors due 6/7/2005. List of Equity Security Holders
due 6/7/2005. Inventory of Property due 6/7/2005. Matrix due
6/7/2005. Schedules A-J due 6/7/2005. Statement of Financial Affairs
due 6/7/2005. Summary of schedules due 6/7/2005 are filed within 15
days of the date of the petition, or unless a timely request for an
extension time is submitted, this case may be dismissed.. (P., Betty)
(Entered: 05/23/2005)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
8 of 9

Page 48 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

Live Database Area - Docket Report
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

https://ecf.paeb.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?748736903472216...
Page
Page 51
51 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

05/23/2005

4

Application to Pay Filing Fee in Installments Filed by Stanley J.
Caterbone Represented by Self(Counsel). (Attachments: # 1 Proposed
Order) (P., Betty) (Entered: 05/23/2005)

05/23/2005

3

Pro Se Statement Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone . (P., Betty) (Entered:
05/23/2005)

05/23/2005

2

Statement of Social Security Number Received. Filed by Stanley J.
Caterbone . (P., Betty) (Entered: 05/23/2005)

05/23/2005

1

Chapter 11 Voluntary Petition. Receipt Number 0, Fee Amount $0.00
Filed by Stanley J. Caterbone. 20 Largest Unsecured Creditors due
6/7/2005. List of Equity Security Holders due 6/7/2005. Inventory of
Property due 6/7/2005. Matrix due 6/7/2005. Schedules A-J due
6/7/2005. Statement of Financial Affairs due 6/7/2005. Summary of
schedules due 6/7/2005. Incomplete Filings due by 6/7/2005. (P.,
Betty) (Entered: 05/23/2005)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
07/08/2006 15:58:29
PACER
Login:

am3189

Client
Code:

Description:

Docket
Report

Search
Criteria:

05-23059-ref Fil or Ent: filed
Doc From: 0 Doc To:
99999999 Term: included
Format: HTML

Billable
Pages:

5

Cost:

0.40

Advanced Media Group re RICO
9 of 9

Page 49 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/8/2006 4:17 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?485379719275882...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 52
52 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

STANDARD

United States District Court
Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:06-cv-01538-AB

IN RE: CATERBONE
Assigned to: HONORABLE ANITA B. BRODY
Related Case: 2:05-cv-03689-AB
Case in other court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court E.D. of
Pennsylvania, 05-23059
Cause: 28:0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BA

Date Filed: 04/11/2006
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 422 Bankruptcy Appeal
(801)
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Appellant
STANLEY J. CATERBONE

represented by STANLEY J. CATERBONE
220 STONE HILL ROAD
CONESTOGA, PA 17516
US
PRO SE

V.
Appellee
FULTON BANK

represented by SHAWN M. LONG
BARLEY SNYDER SENFT &
COHEN
126 EAST KING STREET
LANCASTER, PA 17602
717-399-1512
Email: slong@barley.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Debtor-in-Possess
STANLEY J. CATERBONE

represented by STANLEY J. CATERBONE
(See above for address)
PRO SE

Trustee
UNITED STATES TRUSTEE

Advanced Media Group re RICO
1 of 3

represented by UNITED STATES TRUSTEE
833 CHESTNUT STREET
SUITE 500

Page 50 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:29 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?485379719275882...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 53
53 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
PRO SE

Date Filed

#

Docket Text

06/12/2006

8 Reply Brief of the Fulton Bank's Answer to Appeal, filed by STANLEY J.
CATERBONE, Certificate of Service. (gn, ) (Entered: 06/12/2006)

05/30/2006

7 Appellee's BRIEF by FULTON BANK. Appellant Reply Brief due by
6/6/2006. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(LONG, SHAWN)
(Entered: 05/30/2006)

05/15/2006

6 ANSWER to Complaint by STANLEY J. CATERBONE.(gn, ) (Entered:
05/16/2006)

05/03/2006

5 ORDER THAT UPON CONSIDERATION OF APPELLANT'S
MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE, IT IS ORDERED THAT THE
MOTION IS DENIED AS MOOT.SIGNED BY JUDGE ANITA B.
BRODY ON 05/03/06.05/03/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED,
E-MAILED (ldb, ) (Entered: 05/03/2006)

04/26/2006

4 MOTION FOR A (15) DAY CONTINUANCE OF THE COURT
PROCEEDING, FILED BY PLFF STANLEY J. CATERBONE,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE..(gn, ) (Entered: 04/26/2006)

04/25/2006

3 ORDER - UPON CONSIDERATION OF APPELLANT'S REQUEST
FOR ANE EXTENSION OF TIME, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) THE
REQUEST IS GRANTED; (2) THE APPELLANT SHALL SERVE AND
FILE HIS BRIEF ON OR BEFORE MAY 15, 2006; (3) THE APPELLE
SHALL SERVE AND FILE HIS BRIEF WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER
SERVICE OF THE BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT; (4) THE
APPELLANT MAY SERVE AND FILE A REPLY BRIEF WITHIN 10
DAYS AFTER SERVICE OF THE BRIEF OF THE APPELLEE..
SIGNED BY JUDGE ANITA B. BRODY ON 4/24/2006. 4/25/2006
ENTERED AND COPIES VIA ECF AND U.S. MAIL(mo, ) Modified on
4/28/2006 (mo, ). (Entered: 04/25/2006)

04/11/2006

2 Briefing Schedule 4/12/06 Entered and copies mailed. (ss, ) Additional
attachment(s) added on 4/12/2006 (ss, ). (Entered: 04/12/2006)

04/11/2006

1 Certificate of Appeal of STANLEY J. CATERBONE from the order of
Bankruptcy Judge RICHARD E. FEHLING (No. 05-23059). (ss, )
(Entered: 04/12/2006)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

Advanced Media Group re RICO
2 of 3

Page 51 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:29 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?485379719275882...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 54
54 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

07/06/2006 14:28:25
PACER
Login:

am3189

Client Code:

Description:

Docket
Report

Search
Criteria:

2:06-cv-01538-AB

Cost:

0.08

Billable Pages: 1

Advanced Media Group re RICO
3 of 3

Page 52 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:29 PM

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act - Wikipedia, t...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 55
55 of
of 165
165

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RICO_(law)
Monday, January 04, 2016

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from RICO (law))
The neutrality of this article or section may be compromised by "weasel words".
Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly referred to as RICO) is a United States
federal law which provides for extended penalties for criminal acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal
organization. RICO was enacted by section 901(a) of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, Pub. L. No.
91-452, 84 Stat. 922 (Oct. 15, 1970). RICO is codified as Chapter 96 of Title 18 of the United States Code,
18 U.S.C. § 1961 through 18 U.S.C. § 1968.
It has been speculated that the name and acronym were selected in a sly reference to the movie Little Caesar, which
featured a notorious gangster named "Rico." The original drafter of the bill, G. Robert Blakey, has refused to
confirm or deny this.[1]

Contents
1 Summary
2 RICO offenses and definitions
3 Where RICO laws might be applied
4 Famous cases
5 References
6 External links

Summary
Under RICO, a person or group who commits any two of 35 crimes—27 federal crimes and 8 state crimes—within
a 10-year period and, in the opinion of the US Attorney bringing the case, has committed those crimes with similar
purpose or results can be charged with racketeering. Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000
and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any
business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity." The act also contains a civil component that allows
plaintiffs to sue for triple damages.
When the U.S. Attorney decides to indict someone under RICO, he has the option of seeking a pre-trial restraining
order or injunction to prevent the transfer of potentially forfeitable property, as well as require the defendant to put
up a performance bond. This provision is intended to force a defendant to plead guilty before indictment.
There is also a provision for private parties to sue. A "person damaged in his business or property" can sue one or
more "racketeers." There must also be an "enterprise." The defendant(s) are not the enterprise, in other words, the
defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same. There must be one of four specified relationships between

Advanced Media Group re RICO
1 of 4

Page 53 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/9/2006 5:31 AM

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act - Wikipedia, t...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 56
56 of
of 165
165

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RICO_(law)
Monday, January 04, 2016

the defendant(s) and the enterprise. This lawsuit, like all Federal civil lawsuits, can take place in either Federal or
State court. http://www.dealer-magazine.com/index.asp?article=481

RICO offenses and definitions
Racketeering activity means:
Any act or threat involving gambling, murder, kidnapping, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in
obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the
Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more
than one year;
Any act which is indictable under a wide variety of specific provisions of title 18 of the United States Code
relating to bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery,
racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, etc.
Any act which is indictable under title 29, United States Code, section 186 (dealing with restrictions on
payments and loans to labor organizations) or section 501 (c) (relating to embezzlement from union funds),
Any offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (except a case under section 157 of this
title), fraud in the sale of securities, or the felonious manufacture, importation, receiving, concealment,
buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of
the Controlled Substances Act), punishable under any law of the United States,
Any act which is indictable under the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act,
Any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274 (relating to bringing in
and harboring certain aliens), section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting certain aliens to enter the United
States), or section 278 (relating to importation of alien for immoral purpose) if the act indictable under such
section of such Act was committed for the purpose of financial gain, or
Any act that is indictable under any provision listed in section 2332b (g)(5)(B);
Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the
effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment)
after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity;

Where RICO laws might be applied
Although some of the RICO predicate acts are extortion and blackmail, one of the most successful applications of
the RICO laws has been the ability to indict or sanction individuals for their behavior and actions committed
against witnesses and victims in alleged retaliation or retribution for cooperating with law enforcement or
intelligence agencies.
The RICO laws can be alleged in cases where civil lawsuits or criminal charges are brought against individuals or
corporations in retaliation for said individuals or corporations working with law enforcement, or against individuals
or corporations who have sued or filed criminal charges against a defendant.
Anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) laws can be applied in an attempt to curb alleged
abuses of the legal system by individuals or corporations who utilize the courts as a weapon to retaliate against
whistle blowers, victims, or to silence another's speech. RICO could be alleged if it can be shown that lawyers
and/or their clients conspired and collaborated to concoct fictitious legal complaints solely in retribution and
retaliation for themselves having been brought before the courts.
These laws also apply to victims of clergy abuse where statute of limitations has run out.

Advanced Media Group re RICO
2 of 4

Page 54 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/9/2006 5:31 AM

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act - Wikipedia, t...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 57
57 of
of 165
165

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RICO_(law)
Monday, January 04, 2016

Famous cases
On November 21, 1980, Frank "Funzi" Tieri was the first Cosa Nostra boss to be convicted under the RICO Act.
In 1988, the owner of Florida Title Insurance, Inc. in Panama City, Florida sent copies of proposed qui.tam suit
against 32 defendants with 12 Counts of Racketeering to the Justice Department as required, just to get them
returned in a plain manila envelope with no cover letter regarding the RICO Act violations involving a competitor
company, the IRS, with the IRS Agent threatening the life of Plaintiff on behalf of defendants and others. IRS
Agent was found dead just days after being served by U.S. Marshals. Autopsy was conducted by Coroner later
convicted of Murder. Case went before numerous Federal Judges in Northern District of Florida, who denied all
motions including one for discovery conference, seizure of assets due to the defendant's failure to appear, 11th
Circuit on Appeal with 15 minute argument (first hearing) with most spent trying to get the Government to have an
independent autopsy of the IRS Agent and was denied access to Supreme Court due to minute error in spacing and
Clerical Abuse of Discretion in pro.ce case.
In 2002, the former minority owners of the Montréal Expos baseball team filed charges under the RICO Act
against Major League Baseball commissioner Bud Selig and former Expos owner Jeffrey Loria, claiming that Selig
and Loria deliberately conspired to devalue the team for personal benefit in preparation for a move. If found guilty,
Major League Baseball could have been found liable for up to $300 million in punitive damages. The case lasted
for two years, successfully stalling the Expos' move to Washington or contraction during that time. It was
eventually sent to arbitration and settled for an undisclosed sum, permitting the move to Washington to take place.
This happened notably after Loria, now owner of the Florida Marlins, had received a significant financial boost
after winning the World Series and Selig refused to permit the Expos to engage in September callups, effectively
ending their chances at making the playoffs.
RICO laws were cited in NOW v. Scheidler, a suit in which certain parties sought damages and an injunction
against anti-abortion activists who physically block access to abortion clinics.
In 2005, Tanya Andersen of Oregon responded to a lawsuit on behalf of Atlantic Records by in turn suing them
under the RICO laws. Her suit alleges that RIAA members, in this particular case Atlantic, engaged in illegal
computer trespass, extortion, and unfair trade practices under Oregon state law.
On April 26, 2006 the Supreme Court heard Mohawk Industries, Inc. v. Williams, which concerned what sort of
corporations fell under the scope of RICO. Mohawk Industries had alledgely hired illegal alliens, in violation of
RICO. The court will decide whether or not Mohawk Industries, along with recruiting agencies, constitutes an
'enterprise' that can be prosecuted under RICO.

References
1. ^ RICO Suave (http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/rico.asp) . Snopes.com: (21 December 2004).
Retrieved on 2006-03-26.

External links
RICO Act from Cornell University's U. S. Code database
(http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sup_01_18_10_I_20_96.html)
Detail of Tanya Andersen's claim against Atlantic Records
(http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2005/10/oregon-riaa-victim-fights-back-sues.html)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act"
Categories: Articles with weasel words | United States federal legislation | Organized crime terminology | 1970 in
Advanced Media Group re RICO
3 of 4

Page 55 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/9/2006 5:31 AM

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act - Wikipedia, t...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 58
58 of
of 165
165

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RICO_(law)
Monday, January 04, 2016

law

This page was last modified 15:49, 5 July 2006.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for
details.)
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

Advanced Media Group re RICO
4 of 4

Page 56 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/9/2006 5:31 AM

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 59
59 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STANLEY J. CATERBONE

v.
LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON, $''&EL

NO. 05-2288
ORDER

---AND NOW, this 5th day of January, ~ F O Gupon-,

-- -

consideration of the plaintiff's December 17, 2005 letter to the
Court requesting to amend the complaint and for a hearing, whereas
the complaint was filed and summons were issued to the pro se

plaintiff on May 16, 2005, and whereas the plaintiff has not served
the summons and complaint within 120 days after filing
- the
. ,... .
. ..
' . .
- ,
complaint, as required by ~ i l e4(m) of the ~ e h e r k~ U l kof Civil

-

procedure, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the plaintiff shall serve the
summons and complaint on or before January 25, 2006.

If the

plaintiff does not do so, the Court will dismiss the complaint
without prejudice. The Court will consider the plaintiff's request
to amend the complaint and for a hearing after the summons and
complaint are served.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's motion to

file the complaint under seal (Docket No. 2 ) is DENIED.

A document

in a civil action may be filed under seal only if the action is
brought pursuant to a federal statute that prescribes the sealing
of the record, or where good cause is established.

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 57 of 112

+@i'
July 9, 2006

5.1.5 (a)(1) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure; Pansv
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 60
60 of
of 165
165

v. Borough

Monday, January 04, 2016

of Stroudsburq, 23 F.3d 772, 786 ( 3 d Cir. 1994). The party seeking
confidentiality may establish good cause by showing that disclosure
will work a "clearly defined and serious injury" to that party;
"broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated by specific examples or
articulated reasoning," are insufficient. Id. Even when judged by
the less stringent standards by which courts judge p~

se

pleadings, the plaintiff has not brought suit under a statute that
requires t h e - s U g _ o f the-record, or +own

good cause for doing
- - -

so. The plaintiff alleges that several threats have been made on

his life, but does not provide any facts to support this
allegation, or explain how these alleged threats relate to his
complaint.

BY THE COURT:

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 58 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 61
61 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STANLEY J. CATERBONE

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 05-2288

v.

LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON, ET AL.

MOTION
I hereby request a meeting, ex parte, with the Honorable Mary A. McLaughlin as per the
ORDER of January 6th, 2006. The PLAINTIFF requests the meeting to discuss the
problems of preceding this action without obstruction of justice; and to amend the original
complaint as discussed previously.

DATED:

May 30, 2006

Advanced Media Group re RICO

__________________________
Advanced Media Group
Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 17516
717-431-8184
717-421-1621 Facsimile

Page 59 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 62
62 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

EXHIBIT A

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 60 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 63
63 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

EXHIBIT B

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 61 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 64
64 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 62 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 65
65 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

January 13, 2005
Stanley J. Caterbone (pro se)
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 17516
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Honorable Judge Mary A. McLaughlin
Room # 13614
601 Market Street, Room 2609
Philadelphia, PA 19106-1748
Phone: (215) 597-7704
Fax: (215) 597-6390 600
Re: Case No. 05-2288
Honorable Judge Mary A. McLaughlin,
I have received your court order of January 5, and will proceed accordingly.
In addition, I would like to inform you of a recent complaint IFCC Complaint Referral
Report Complaint Number: I06010506177009.
Please see attached.

Respectfully,

Stanley J. Caterbone
Attachment:

IFCC Complaint No.

Cc:

file
Mr. Hugh Ward, Department of Justice, Office of Trustee
Honorable Judge Thomas M. Twardowski, United States Bankruptcy
Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 63 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 66
66 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STANLEY J. CATERBONE

v.
LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON, $''&EL

NO. 05-2288
ORDER

---AND NOW, this 5th day of January, ~ F O Gupon-,

-- -

consideration of the plaintiff's December 17, 2005 letter to the
Court requesting to amend the complaint and for a hearing, whereas
the complaint was filed and summons were issued to the pro se

plaintiff on May 16, 2005, and whereas the plaintiff has not served
the summons and complaint within 120 days after filing
- the
. ,... .
. ..
' . .
- ,
complaint, as required by ~ i l e4(m) of the ~ e h e r k~ U l kof Civil

-

procedure, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the plaintiff shall serve the
summons and complaint on or before January 25, 2006.

If the

plaintiff does not do so, the Court will dismiss the complaint
without prejudice. The Court will consider the plaintiff's request
to amend the complaint and for a hearing after the summons and
complaint are served.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff's motion to

file the complaint under seal (Docket No. 2 ) is DENIED.

A document

in a civil action may be filed under seal only if the action is
brought pursuant to a federal statute that prescribes the sealing
of the record, or where good cause is established.

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 64 of 112

+@i'
July 9, 2006

5.1.5 (a)(1) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure; Pansv
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 67
67 of
of 165
165

v. Borough

Monday, January 04, 2016

of Stroudsburq, 23 F.3d 772, 786 ( 3 d Cir. 1994). The party seeking
confidentiality may establish good cause by showing that disclosure
will work a "clearly defined and serious injury" to that party;
"broad allegations of harm, unsubstantiated by specific examples or
articulated reasoning," are insufficient. Id. Even when judged by
the less stringent standards by which courts judge p~

se

pleadings, the plaintiff has not brought suit under a statute that
requires t h e - s U g _ o f the-record, or +own

good cause for doing
- - -

so. The plaintiff alleges that several threats have been made on

his life, but does not provide any facts to support this
allegation, or explain how these alleged threats relate to his
complaint.

BY THE COURT:

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 65 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 68
68 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

IFCC COMPLAINT REFERRAL REPORT
Complaint Number: I06010506177009
The following information was provided by the victim and will be forwarded to the appropriate law
enforcement or regulatory agency.

International Fraud
Date of Complaint: 1/5/2006 6:17:08 AM
Victim Information
Business Name:
Advanced Media Group
Name:
Stan Caterbone Caterbone
DOB:
07/15/1958
Gender:
M
Phone #:
717-799-5915
Email:
amgroup01@msn.com
Address:
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 17516
Live in city limits: No
County:
Lancaster
Country:
USA
Do you have pertinent documents in paper form? Yes
Please indicate who your local law enforcement agency is:
Southern Regional Police Department
Please List the easiest way and most convenient time to contact you:
cell phone, email, anytime
Information about the Business that victimized you.
Name:
Gender: U
Phone #:
Current Email:
Address:
Country: USA
Contact between you and the Person/company that victimized you.
Type of Contact: Web Page
Date of Contact: 01/30/2005

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 66 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 69
69 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Total money lost on contact date: $2,200.00
Money lost in total: $0.00
Contact Information:
On January 30 I had planned to visit Los Cabos, Mexico, for a business
trip. I had used the Internet to locate the airport (PTO) for that
destination to locate and book the necessary travel accommodations. ¿PVR¿
(Puerto Vallarta, Mexico) appeared on several Google searches as that
airport. I accordingly booked flight itinerary and tickets for that trip.
On January 31 I booked a flight from Houston Hobby airport to ¿PVR¿
(Continental Flight 1768, Seat 10D). I had some knowledge of the PTO
system, having the national register for PTO¿s when I had my plane
operating, the Piper Navajo Chieftain, in 1987. I had logged several
flights, as far away as Atlanta, and booked it for charter to several clients.
¿PVR¿ was not, in fact, the airport for that destination. I had consumed
an estimated $2,000 in expenses for that trip, and never was able to travel
to Los Cabos as planned. I was denied a car rental after landing in ¿PVR¿
without any lodging accommodations. I had to spend 3 evenings in the ¿PVR¿
airport because of no lodging accommodations. The only accommodation I
could find was at a price of $389.00 (Marriot Hotel) per night, well beyond
my budget.
I was not allowed fair access to certain return flights to Houston Hobby
airport, and was in a constant state of intimidation by the agents at ¿PVR¿
that were under the employ of Continental Airlines. Continental Airlines
made no attempt to remedy any of these problems, or make any attempt to
accommodate my concerns or complaints.
Southwest Airlines conveniently lost my only piece of carryon luggage from
Philadelphia to Houston, on January 31 (Flight 1950/2646); which contained
my only seasonal clothing, as well as legal and business files of the
Advanced Media Group, and related computer hardware. I had to purchase
shorts, t-shirts, and sandals, because of that mishap. Southwest Airlines
made no real attempt to transport the lost baggage to ¿PVR¿, where I needed
it, and tried to use acts of intimidation during my filing of that claim in
the Houston Hobby office of Southwest Airlines. (Southwest Airlines Lost
Baggage Claim Report number 1000777444).
I estimate that the lost monies for this mishap to be approximately $2,200.
The airfare alone was $1500. Car rental fees (Avis) were approximately
$170. Clothing and other related accessories were approximately $100.00.
Food expenses were approximately $200.
upon finally arriving back at the Philadelphia Airport, my battery had been

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 67 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 70
70 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

tampered with, and my final trip home was extended an additional 3 hours,
this was after the delay of another 4 hours by the Southwest flight from
Orlando to Philadelphia.
I had been randomly selected for ¿private¿ searches by the Homeland
Security agents upon every stop, and in Houston, Texas, was accused by an
inspection device (false positive reading) as carrying a plastic explosive
in my carry-on luggage, and was treated as such.
In addition, a portable storage device was also corrupted during this
process, via the Internet.
Spending New Years Eve in the ¿PVR¿ airport, cold with only rigid, hard,
and very uncomfortable seating, with no one that understood English, all
the while experiencing extreme back pain (currently under a physician¿s
care and treatment) ---- priceless.
Description of how you were defrauded:
On January 30 I had planned to visit Los Cabos, Mexico, for a business
trip. I had used the Internet to locate the airport (PTO) for that
destination to locate and book the necessary travel accommodations.
¿PVR¿ (Puerto Vallarta, Mexico) appeared on several Google searches as
that airport. I accordingly booked flight itinerary and tickets for
that trip. On January 31 I booked a flight from Houston Hobby airport
to ¿PVR¿ (Continental Flight 1768, Seat 10D). I had some knowledge of
the PTO system, having the national register for PTO¿s when I had my
plane operating, the Piper Navajo Chieftain, in 1987. I had logged
several flights, as far away as Atlanta, and booked it for charter to
several clients.
¿PVR¿ was not, in fact, the airport for that destination. I had
consumed an estimated $2,000 in expenses for that trip, and never was
able to travel to Los Cabos as planned. I was denied a car rental
after landing in ¿PVR¿ without any lodging accommodations. I had to
spend 3 evenings in the ¿PVR¿ airport because of no lodging
accommodations. The only accommodation I could find was at a price of
$389.00 (Marriot Hotel) per night, well beyond my budget.
I was not allowed fair access to certain return flights to Houston
Hobby airport, and was in a constant state of intimidation by the
agents at ¿PVR¿ that were under the employ of Continental Airlines.
Continental Airlines made no attempt to remedy any of these problems,
or make any attempt to accommodate my concerns or complaints.
Southwest Airlines conveniently lost my only piece of carryon luggage

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 68 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 71
71 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

from Philadelphia to Houston, on January 31 (Flight 1950/2646); which
contained my only seasonal clothing, as well as legal and business
files of the Advanced Media Group, and related computer hardware. I
had to purchase shorts, t-shirts, and sandals, because of that mishap.
Southwest Airlines made no real attempt to transport the lost baggage
to ¿PVR¿, where I needed it, and tried to use acts of intimidation
during my filing of that claim in the Houston Hobby office of
Southwest Airlines. (Southwest Airlines Lost Baggage Claim Report
number 1000777444).
I estimate that the lost monies for this mishap to be approximately
$2,200. The airfare alone was $1500. Car rental fees (Avis) were
approximately $170. Clothing and other related accessories were
approximately $100.00. Food expenses were approximately $200.
upon finally arriving back at the Philadelphia Airport, my battery had
been tampered with, and my final trip home was extended an additional
3 hours, this was after the delay of another 4 hours by the Southwest
flight from Orlando to Philadelphia.
I had been randomly selected for ¿private¿ searches by the Homeland
Security agents upon every stop, and in Houston, Texas, was accused by
an inspection device (false positive reading) as carrying a plastic
explosive in my carry-on luggage, and was treated as such.
In addition, a portable storage device was also corrupted during this
process, via the Internet.
Spending New Years Eve in the ¿PVR¿ airport, cold with only rigid,
hard, and very uncomfortable seating, with no one that understood
English, all the while experiencing extreme back pain (currently under
a physician¿s care and treatment) ---- priceless.

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 69 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 72
72 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 70 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 73
73 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 71 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 74
74 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 72 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 75
75 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 73 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 76
76 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 74 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 77
77 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 75 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 78
78 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 76 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 79
79 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 77 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 80
80 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 78 of 112

July 9, 2006

y 04,
Page
Page
2016
81
81
15-3400
1
5-3400
of
of 165
165L

lyPage
9, 2006
79
Advanced
of 112

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 82
82 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 80 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act Page
Page 83
83 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 81 of 112

Monday, January 04, 2016

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 84
84 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 82 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 85
85 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 83 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO
Page
Page
Act
86
86 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO
Page 84 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 87
87 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 85 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 88
88 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 86 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal
Page
Page
re RICO
89
89 of
ofAct
165
Monday,
165
January 04, 2016

Advanced Media GroupPage
re RICO
87 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 90
90 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 88 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 91
91 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 89 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 92
92 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 90 of 112

July 9, 2006

USPS - Print Shipping Labels - Label Confirmation

1 of 1

https://sss-web.usps.com/cns/answerQuestion.do

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 93
93 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Please print this page for your records or refer to your Shipping History for details. You will also receive a confirmation
email.
3 Domestic Labels successfully printed. Total (charged): $12.15

Refunds can be requested for unused labels up to 10 days after the print date. If you have any questions
contact us.

Printed Label Summary
Transaction #: 60062626
Credit Card: VISA 6125

Option Chosen : Postage
Print Date/Time : 1/13/06 5:40:07 PM CST

Standardized Package
Service Price
Delivery
Information Options
Address
Batch
(1 of 3)

HUGH J. WARD
U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE
833 CHESTNUT ST
STE 500
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107-4414

Weight: 0 lbs. 6 oz.
Shipping Date: 01/13/06
From: 17516

Priority Mail Flat Rate
Env:

$4.05

Delivery Confirm.:

No Charge

Label Total:

$4.05

Delivery Confirmation™ Label Number: 0103 8555 7496 6813 6070
Batch
(2 of 3)

MICHAEL E. KUNZ, CLE
UNITED STATES DISTRI
601 MARKET ST RM 260
U.S. COURTHOUSE
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-1732

Weight: 0 lbs. 6 oz.
Shipping Date: 01/13/06
From: 17516

Priority Mail Flat Rate
Env:

$4.05

Delivery Confirm.:

No Charge

Label Total:

$4.05

Priority Mail Flat Rate
Env:

$4.05

Delivery Confirm.:

No Charge

Label Total:

$4.05

Delivery Confirmation™ Label Number: 0103 8555 7495 1084 9684
Batch
(3 of 3)

JUDGE T. M. TWARDOWS
U.S. BANKRUPTCY COUR
400 WASHINGTON ST
READING, PA 19601-3915

Weight: 0 lbs. 6 oz.
Shipping Date: 01/13/06
From: 17516

Delivery Confirmation™ Label Number: 0103 8555 7495 2133 5442

Total (3 Domestic Labels): $12.15

Save time online - Order a Scale! Order Self-Adhesive Labels! Order Free Shipping Supplies!
See Frequently Asked Questions for additional information and customer support.

Thank you for choosing the United States Postal Service®

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 91 of 112

July 9, 2006

1/13/2006 6:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 94
94 of
of 165
165
Query

Advanced Media Group re RICO
1 of 1

Reports

Page 92 of 112

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/framemenu.pl
Monday, January 04, 2016
Utilities

Logout

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 95
95 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

SUSPENSE

United States District Court
Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv-02288-MAM

CATERBONE v. LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON et al
Assigned to: HONORABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN
Cause: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

Date Filed: 05/01/2005
Jury Demand: Defendant
Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
STANLEY J. CATERBONE

represented by STANLEY J. CATERBONE
220 STONE HILL ROAD
CONESTOGA, PA 17516
US
PRO SE

V.
Defendant
LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006

represented by ROBERT W. HALLINGER
APPEL & YOST LLP
33 NORTH DUKE ST
LANCASTER, PA 17602
717-394-0521
Email: rhallinger@appelyost.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE
DEPT.

represented by CHRISTOPHER S. UNDERHILL
HARTMAN UNDERHILL &
BRUBAKER LLP
221 E. CHESTNUT ST.
LANCASTER, PA 17602-2782
717-299-7254
Fax: 717-299-3160
Email: chrisu@hublaw.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant

Advanced Media Group re RICO
1 of 7

Page 93 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 96
96 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

STONE HARBOR POLICE DEPT.
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006
Defendant
AVALON POLICE EPT.
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006

represented by WALTER H. SWAYZE, III
SEGAL, MCCAMBRIDGE, SINGER
& MAHONEY
30 S. 17TH ST
STE 1700
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
215-972-8015
Email: pswayze@smsm.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
PATRICIA BAXTER
SEGAL MCCAMBRIDGE SINGER &
MAHONEY, LTD.
UNITED PLAZA
30 SOUTH 17TH STREET
SUITE 1700
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
215-399-2007
Email: pbaxter@smsm.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
COMMONWEALTH NATIONAL
BANK
i.e. MELLON BANK

represented by GEORGE M. GOWEN, III
COZEN O'CONNOR
1900 MARKET STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
215-665-2000
Fax: 215-665-2013
Email: ggowen@cozen.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
STUART A. WEISS
COZEN O'CONNOR
1900 MARKET STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
215-665-2000
Email: sweiss@cozen.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant

Advanced Media Group re RICO
2 of 7

Page 94 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 97
97 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE
DEPT.
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006
Defendant
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFFS
DEPT.
TERMINATED: 06/13/2006
Defendant
represented by STEPHANIE CARFLEY
BARLEY SNYDER SENFT &
COHEN LLC
126 EAST KING ST
LANCASTER, PA 17602-2832
TEL 717-299-5201
Email: scarfley@barley.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

FULTON BANK

Date Filed

#

Docket Text

06/30/2006

36 ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO DISMISS OF LANCASTER
COUNTY PRISON IS DENIED AS MOOT. SIGNED BY JUDGE
MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN. 7/3/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED,
AND E-MAILED.(sc, ) (Entered: 07/03/2006)

06/30/2006

35 AFFIDAVIT of Howard Kelin by LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON.
(HALLINGER, ROBERT) (Entered: 06/30/2006)

06/30/2006

34 AFFIDAVIT of Vincent Guarini by LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON.
(HALLINGER, ROBERT) (Entered: 06/30/2006)

06/30/2006

33 Memorandum in Support re 32 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by
LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON. (HALLINGER, ROBERT) (Entered:
06/30/2006)

06/30/2006

32 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by LANCASTER COUNTY
PRISON.Certificate of Service.(HALLINGER, ROBERT) (Entered:
06/30/2006)

06/19/2006

31 ORDER THAT TO THE THE EXTENT THAT PLAINTIFF
REQUESTS LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT IN HIS
REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION FOR AN EX PARTE
MEETING WITH THE COURT, THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE
COMPLAINT SHALL BE CONSIDERED A MOTION TO FILE AN
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND SAID MOTION IS GRANTED.
SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 6/19/06. 6/19/06
ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered:

Advanced Media Group re RICO
3 of 7

Page 95 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 98
98 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

06/19/2006)
06/14/2006

30 REPLY to Fulton Bank's response to plff's motion for ex parte meeting
with Honorable Mary A. McLaughlin, filed by plff STANLEY J.
CATERBONE, Certificate of Service. (gn, ) (Entered: 06/15/2006)

06/13/2006

29 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS
OF MELLON BANK, MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DET AND
FULTON BANK ARE GRANTED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN A
MEMORANDUM. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PLFF'S
COMPLAINT IS ALSO DISMISSED AS TO DEFTS SOUTHERN
REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT, STONE HARBOR POLICE
DEPARTMENT, AVALON POLICE DEPT, LANCASTER COUNTY
PRISON AND LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF
TODAY'S DATE. FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PLFF'S MOTION
FOR AN EX PARTE MEETING WITH THE COURT IS DENIED AS
MOOT.. SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON
6/13/06.6/14/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.
(lvj, ) (Entered: 06/14/2006)

06/05/2006

28 RESPONSE to Motion re [26] MOTION for Ex Parte Meeting filed by
FULTON BANK, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of
Proposed Order)(CARFLEY, STEPHANIE) Modified on 6/7/2006 (np).
(Entered: 06/05/2006)

06/02/2006

27 RESPONSE in Opposition re [26] MOTION FOR AN EX PARTE
MEETING WITH THE COURT filed by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP
POLICE DEPT.. (UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER) (Entered:
06/02/2006)

06/01/2006

26 MOTION FOR A MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PROBLEMS OF
PRCEDING THIS ACTION WITHOUT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE,
FILED BY PLFF STANLEY J. CATERBONE, CERTIFICATES OF
SERVICE..(gn, ) (Entered: 06/02/2006)

04/26/2006

25 NOTICE of Appearance by WALTER H. SWAYZE, III on behalf of
AVALON POLICE EPT. with JURY DEMAND & CERTIFICATE OF
SERVICE (SWAYZE, WALTER) (Entered: 04/26/2006)

04/26/2006

24 NOTICE of Appearance by PATRICIA BAXTER on behalf of AVALON
POLICE EPT. with JURY DEMAND & CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
(BAXTER, PATRICIA) (Entered: 04/26/2006)

04/12/2006

23 ORDER THAT THE CASE SHALL BE PLACED IN CIVIL SUSPENSE
UNTIL 5/11/06. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON
4/11/06. ) 4/12/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND
E-MAILED.(gn, ) (Entered: 04/12/2006)

04/10/2006

22 NOTICE by plff STANLEY J. CATERBONE for continuance. (gn, )
(Entered: 04/10/2006)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
4 of 7

Page 96 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 99
99 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

03/06/2006

21 Request for MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution Be Granted
filed by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPT., Certificate of Service.
(UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER) Modified on 3/7/2006 (np). (Entered:
03/06/2006)

02/23/2006

20 MOTION to Dismiss filed by COMMONWEALTH NATIONAL
BANK.Memorandum, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of
Proposed Order # 2 Memorandum of Law# 3 Certificate of
Service)(WEISS, STUART) (Entered: 02/23/2006)

02/09/2006

19 ORDER THAT MOTION OF DEFT MELLON BANK FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER IS GRANTED. IT IS HEREBY
FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE DEADLINE FOR MELLON'S
RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT IS EXTENDED BY 14 DAYS. .
SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 2/9/06.2/9/06
ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED. (lvj, ) (Entered: 02/09/2006)

02/09/2006

18 BRIEF in Support re 17 MOTION to Dismiss filed by FULTON BANK,
Certificate of Service. (CARFLEY, STEPHANIE) Modified on 2/13/2006
(np). (Entered: 02/09/2006)

02/09/2006

17 MOTION to Dismiss filed by FULTON BANK.Certificate of Service.
(Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(CARFLEY, STEPHANIE)
(Entered: 02/09/2006)

02/09/2006

16 Praecipe to Enter Appearance by FULTON BANK; Jury Demand,
Certificate of Service. (CARFLEY, STEPHANIE) Modified on 2/9/2006
(np). (Entered: 02/09/2006)

02/08/2006

15 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer filed by
COMMONWEALTH NATIONAL BANK.Memorandum, Certificate of
Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order # 2 Memorandum of
Law# 3 Certificate of Service)(GOWEN, GEORGE) (Entered:
02/08/2006)

02/06/2006

14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE
DEPT. re 12 MOTION to Dismiss, 13 Memorandum of Law in Support
(UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER) (Entered: 02/06/2006)

02/06/2006

13 Memorandum of Law in Support re 12 MOTION to Dismiss by
MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPT.. (UNDERHILL,
CHRISTOPHER) (Entered: 02/06/2006)

02/06/2006

12 MOTION to Dismiss filed by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE
DEPT..Brief, Affidavit, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit
A# 2 Exhibit B)(UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER) (Entered: 02/06/2006)

02/06/2006

11 Praecipe for Entry of Appearance by MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE
DEPT., Certificate of Service. (UNDERHILL, CHRISTOPHER)
Modified on 2/7/2006 (np). (Entered: 02/06/2006)

Advanced Media Group re RICO
5 of 7

Page 97 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 100
100 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

01/23/2006

10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Avalon Police Dept. by certified mail (
no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Lancaster County Prison by certified
mail ( no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Commonwealth National Bank (Mellon
Bank, N.A.) by certified mail (no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered:
01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Stone Harbor Police Dept. by certified
mail ( no green card attached) (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
summons and complaint upon deft Manheim Township Police Dept. by
certified mail ( no green card attached) (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re served
Summons and Complaint upon deft Lancaster County Sheriffs Dept by
certified mail ( no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/23/2006

4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by STANLEY J. CATERBONE re
Summons and Complaint was served upon Fulton Bank by certified mail
(no green card attached). (gn, ) (Entered: 01/24/2006)

01/06/2006

3 ORDER THAT THE PLFF SHALL SERVE THE SUMMONS AND
COMPLAINT ON OR BEFORE 1/25/06. IF THE PLFF DOES NOT DO
SO, THE COURT WILL DISMISS THE COMPLAINT WITHOUT
PREJUDICE. THE COURT WILL CONSIDER THE PLFF'S REQUEST
TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT AND FOR A HEARING AFTER THE
SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT ARE SERVICED. IT IS FURTHER
ORDERED THAT THE PLFF'S MOTION TO FILE THE COMPLAINT
UNDER SEAL IS DENIED. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A.
MCLAUGHLIN ON 1/5/06.) 1/9/06 ENTERED AND COPIES
MAILED. (gn, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)

05/16/2005

2 MOTION TO SEAL THE COMPLAINT, FILED BY PLFF STANLEY J.
CATERBONE.(gn, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)

05/16/2005

Advanced Media Group re RICO
6 of 7

Summons Issued as to defts' FULTON BANK, LANCASTER COUNTY
PRISON, MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPT., STONE HARBOR
POLICE DEPT., AVALON POLICE EPT., COMMONWEALTH
NATIONAL BANK, SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPT.,
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT. Forwarded To: pro se on
5/16/05 (gn, ) (Entered: 01/12/2006)

Page 98 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Dock... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?855156895895408...
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 101
101 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016

05/16/2005

1 COMPLAINT against defts' FULTON BANK, LANCASTER COUNTY
PRISON, MANHEIM TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPT., STONE HARBOR
POLICE DEPT., AVALON POLICE EPT., COMMONWEALTH
NATIONAL BANK, SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPT.,
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT. ( Filing fee $ 250 receipt
number 916844.), filed by plff STANLEY J. CATERBONE.(gn, )
(Entered: 01/12/2006)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
07/06/2006 14:35:36
PACER
Login:

am3189

Client Code:

Description:

Docket
Report

Search
Criteria:

2:05-cv-02288-MAM

Billable
Pages:

3

Cost:

0.24

Advanced Media Group re RICO
7 of 7

Page 99 of 112

July 9, 2006
7/6/2006 2:40 PM

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 102
102 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

30

STANLEY J. CATERBONE

CIVIL ACTION

v.

LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON, et al.

-

XTJD NOW, this 36fh

NO. 0 5 - 2 2 8 8

:

of Tune, 2 r 0 6 , upon consideration

of the motion to dismiss of Lancaster County Prison (Doc. No. 3 2 ) .
whereas the Court dismissed the complaint as to Lancaster County
Prison on June 12, 2 0 0 6 , and whereas the plaintiff has not filed an
amended complaint, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is DENIED

as MOOT.

BY THE COURT:

MARY -A. MCLAUGHLIN,

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 100 of 112

J?

July 9, 2006

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

STANLEY J. CATERBONE

Page
Page 103
103 of
of 165
165

\LED

LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON, et a1 . . h i d 2 c!-/i

T h , c A ~ ? . 5 ~ ! ~9Je.,
. ~',2iI<

Monday, January 04, 2016

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 05-2288

I>ii '

cy/-

/

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The pro se plaintiff has made numerous allegations
against numerous defendants in his eighty-seven page complaint
The Court will dismiss the complaint as to moving defendants Mellon
Bank (named as "Commonwealth National Bank"), Manheim Township
Police Department, and Fulton Bank for failure to state a claim.
The Court will also dismiss the complaint as to non-moving
defendants Southern Regional Police Department, Stone Harbor Police
Department, AValOn Police Department, Lancaster County Prison and
Lancaster County Sheriff's Department for failure to serve the
complaint and summons.

I.

Failure to State a Claim
Each of the moving defendants has moved to dismiss on

the ground that the plaintiff has failed to state a timely claim.'
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit peh&K

ER

The pro se plaintiff has not opposed any @L&RB,-J~c
motions to dismiss. By letter to the Court dated March 2, 2006,
request filed March 6, 2006, and letter to the Court dated April 4,
2006, Fulton Bank, Manheim Township, and Mellon Bank respectively
requested that their motions be granted as uncontested, pursuant to
Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7.l(c). The United States Court of
Appeals for the ~ h i r dCircuit has indicated, however, that courts
should not grant motions to dismiss against unrepresented parties
without undertaking a merits analysis: stackhouse v. ~azu;kiewicz,
951 F.2d 29, 30 (3d Cir. 1991).
1

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 101 of 112

July 9, 2006

defendants to raise a statute of limitations defense in a motion to

dismiss
under
Rule
the
time-bar
isMonday,
apparent
15-3400
Lambert
Appeal12(b)
re RICO(6)
Act if
Page
Page
104
104 of
of
165
165
Januaryon
04, the
2016 face
of the complaint. Robinson v. Johnson, 313 F.3d 128, 135 (3d Cir.
2002).

The plaintiff's eighty-seven page complaint contains
many allegations regarding numerous persons and entities. The
plaintiff's sole allegation against Mellon Bank/Commonwealth
National Bank, however, is that it wrongfully repossessed the
plaintiff's airplane in July 1987.'

According to the complaint,

the Bank loaned the plaintiff $97,000 towards the purchase of an
airplane in June 1987. The following month, before any payments
were due, the Bank allegedly repossessed the plane, with all of the
plaintiff's personal and business files on board.

The plaintiff

claims that the Bank sought to harm the plaintiff's business to
reduce its competition in the mortgage banking and financial
services businesses, in violation of the 'lender liability laws."
(compl. 25, 31, 34, 37, 83, 3.)

The plaintiff named "Commonwealth National Bank
(i.e. Mellon Bank)" as the defendant, but apparently attempted to
effect service by sending a copy of the complaint to "Legal
Counsel, Mellon Bank, N.A." (Doc. No. 8). According to Mellon
Bank, Mellon formerly owned Commonwealth National. For the
purposes of its current motion, Mellon accepted the plaintiff's
attribution of Commonwealth National's actions to Mellon.
(Mellon's Mot. to Dismiss Mem. at 1 n.1.)
I

The Court assumes that the plaintiff intended to name
Mellon Bank as a defendant for the actions of Commonwealth National
Bank, and will consider and grant Mellon Bank's motion to dismiss
as described. If the plaintiff intended to sue only Commonwealth
National Bank, however, the complaint would be dismissed as to
Advanced Media
Group re RICO
Page
102 of 112to effect service.
July 9, 2006
Commonwealth
National
Bank for
failure

The plaintiff has not explicitly asserted any causes of
action
against
Construing
the allegations
in the
15-3400
Lambert the
AppealBank.
re RICO Act
Page
Page 105
105 of
of 165
165
Monday, January
04, 2016
complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, however,
the plaintiff has arguably asserted claims against the Bank for
conversion, replevin, trespass, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty,

and/or breach of contract arising out of the alleged reposse~sion
Plaintiffs bringing any of these claims must do so
within two or four years. See 42 Pa. C.S. 5 5524(3) and

(7)

(imposing two year statute of limitations on any "action for
taking, detaining or injuring personal property, including actions
for specific recovery thereof,'' and "[alny other action or
proceeding to recover damages for injury to person or property
which is founded on negligent, intentional, or otherwise tortious
conduct or any other action or proceeding sounding in trespass,
including deceit or fraud"); Glaziers

&

Glassworkers Union Local

No. 252 Annuity Fund v. Newbridqe SeC., 93 F.3d 1171, 1186 (3d Cir.
1996) (a breach of fiduciary duty is tortious conduct, subject to a
two year statute of limitations); 42 Pa.C.S.

§

5525(a) (imposing

four year statute of limitations on actions based on written,
express, or implied contracts). The plaintiff initiated this
lawsuit in May 2005, over seventeen years after the alleged
repossession.

It is clear from the face of the complaint that the

plaintiff's claims against the Bank are time-barred.
When considering a motion to dismiss under Fed. R.
Civ. P. 12(b) (61, a court accepts all facts and allegations listed
in the complaint as true and construes them in the light most
favorable to the plaintiff. H.J. Inc. v. Nw. Bell Tel. Co., 492
U.S. 229, 249 (1989); Rocks v. City of ~hiladel~hia,
868 F.2d 644,
Advanced
Media
Group
Page 103 of 112
July 9, 2006
1989)
. re RICO
645 (3d
Cir.
I

With respect to the Manheim Township Police Department,
(11
15-3400
Lambert
Appeal re RICO
Page
Page
106
106 of
of 165
165
the
plaintiff
hasActalleged
that:

when the plaintiff
asked
for
Monday, January
04, 2016

help regarding the repossession of his airplane in July 1987, the

Department's response was to ask "what bank branch repossessed your
aircraft"; (2) on or around September 3, 1987, Detective Larry
Sigler falsely charged the plaintiff with making terroristic
threats; (3) on the same day, after the plaintiff was arrested for
taking his own files from his own office, Detective Larry Mathias
refused to take his statement or inform him of the charges against

him, and unnamed officers used excessive force against him; and (4)
in January 1991, a Lt. Madenspacher called the plaintiff regarding
his letter to the Department of Defense about alleged blackmail
occurring in 1987, but failed to attend a scheduled meeting.
(Compl. at 5-6, 33, 39-40, 59.)
Again construing the allegations in the complaint in the
light most favorable to the plaintiff, he has arguably asserted:
(1) assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious

prosecution and/or malicious abuse of process claims arising out of
the charges and arrest in September 1987; and (2) civil rights
claims under 42 U.S.C. 5 1983, arising out of the Department's
actions or inactions in July and September 1987, and January 1991.
The plaintiff's claims against the Manheim Township
Police Department are also time-barred. Plaintiffs must bring any
claims for intentional torts such as assault, battery, false
imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution and/or malicious
abuse of process within two years.

42 Pa. C.S.

§

5524(1).

Plaintiffs must also bring any 5 1983 civil rights claims within
Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 104 of 112

July 9, 2006

two years.

Garvin v. Citv of Philadel~hia,354 F.3d 215, 220 (3d

Cir.15-3400
2003)Lambert
( 1 1983
arePage
subject
statute
Appealclaims
re RICO Act
Page
107
107 of
of 165
165to Pennsylvania's
Monday, Januarytwo
04, 2016
of limitations governing personal injury actions). The plaintiff
initiated this lawsuit more than fourteen years after his last
alleged interaction with the Manheim Township Police Department.'

Finally, the plaintiff has alleged that Fulton Bank: (1)
was involved in some sort of collusion in 1987;

(2)

embezzled

$5,000 from his checking account in 1990, did not credit the
account for more than 60 days, and never credited the lost interest
income; and ( 3 ) refused to allow the plaintiff's brother, Thomas
Caterbone, to deposit a check in 1996, on the grounds that no funds
were available, and was therefore responsible for his
suicide/wrongful death later that year.

The plaintiff has also

alleged that, in February 2005: ( a ) he had difficulty accessing
certain account statements and was told that he had to pay for
copies of those statements; and (b) a bank customer representative
informed him that when a customer wants to deposit a check for
which no funds are available, the bank must give the customer a
choice between depositing the check or waiting until there are
funds. Finally, the plaintiff has included in his complaint what
appears to be a May 6, 2005 article from the Intelligencer Journal
that names Fulton Bank as a limited partner in Penn Square
Partners, an alleged stakeholder in a proposed Lancaster County
Convention Center.

(Compl. at 6 ( a ) , 55-56, 80-81, 86.)

The complaint states that the plaintiff "rescinded
efforts for due process immediately after loosing [sic] his home
and business," but it also states that the plaintiff "began to
review
his case"
again
in October
1990.
(Compl. at 5 6 . ) July 9, 2006
Advanced
Media Group
re RICO
Page 105
of 112
4

The plaintiff has arguably asserted claims against

Fulton
Bank
for:
(1)re breach
duty,Monday,
fraud,
and/or
unjust
15-3400
Lambert
Appeal
RICO Act of
Page
Pagefiduciary
108
108 of
of 165
165
January
04, 2016
enrichment, for its actions toward the plaintiff in 1990; and (2)
fraud or wrongful death, for its actions toward the plaintiff's
brother in 1996. These claims are time barred as well. As
explained above, there is a two-year statute of limitations on
actions for breach of fiduciary duty or fraud. 42 Pa. C.S. $3
5524(3) and (7). There is a four-year statute of limitations on

unjust enrichment, which is a quasi-contractual claim. 42 Pa. C.S.
§

5525(4).

Finally, there is a two-year statue of limitations on

actions for wrongful death.

42 Pa. C.S. S 5524(2).

The plaintiff's reference to "collusion in 1987" on the
part of Fulton Bank is too vague to state a claim for anything,
even under the liberal notice pleading standards. Likewise, the
plaintiff's allegations regarding his ability to access certain
account statements in February 2005 does not state any recognizable
claim. The plaintiff does not allege that it was illegal for
Fulton Bank to charge to copies of account statements, or
fraudulent for Fulton Bank to say that it charged. The plaintiff
states only that he found the charge "disheartening," in light of
the non-profit status of the account holder.

(Compl. at 81.)

Similarly, the plaintiff's allegations regarding Fulton Bank's
policy on depositing checks with insufficient funds, and its status
as a limited partner in Penn Square Partners, do not state any
claim of wrongdoing against Fulton Bank.

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 106 of 112

July 9, 2006

Failure to Serve the Comolaint

11.

The Appeal
Courtre will
also
15-3400 Lambert
RICO Act
Page
Pagedismiss
109
109 of
of 165
165

the complaint
as 04,
to2016
the non
Monday, January

moving defendants because the plaintiff has failed to properly

serve the complaint and summons, and has therefore failed to compl)
with the Court's January

5,

2006 Order.

The plaintiff bears the

burden of showing that service was valid.

Grand Entertainment

Grouw, Ltd. v. Star Media Sales, Inc., 988 F.2d 476, 488 (3d Cir.
1993).
The plaintiff has not submitted any evidence that he
attempted to serve the Southern Regional Police Department.
For each of the other defendants, the plaintiff filed a

"Certificate of Service," certifying that the plaintiff mailed "the
foregoing pleadingn to certain a named or unnamed individual(s)
associated with the defendant, via certified mail.

The plaintiff's

attempts at service were improper as to the Lancaster County
(Pennsylvania) Prison and Sheriff's Department, and the Stone
Harbor and Avalon (New Jersey) Police department^.^

Each of these

defendants is an arm of a governmental organization.
Rule 4(j) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
provides :
Service upon a state, municipal corporation or other
governmental organization subject to suit shall be
effected by deliverinq a copy of the summons and of the
complaint to its chief executive officer or by serving
the summons and complaint in the manner prescribed bv

Mellon Bank, Manheim Township Police Department,
and Fulton Bank also moved to dismiss for improper service.
Because the Court is dismissing the complaint as against them for
failure to state a claim, the Court need not decide the sufficiency
Advanced as
Media
re RICO
Page 107 of 112
July 9, 2006
of service
toGroup
these
defendants.
5

the law of that state for the service of summons or
other like process upon any such defendant.
15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act Page
Page 110
110 of
of 165
165

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (j) (2)(emphasis added) .

Monday, January 04, 2016

Rule 422(b) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure
provides :

Service of original process upon a political subdivision
shall be made by handins a cowv to
(1) an agent duly authorized by the political
subdivision to receive service of process, or
(2) the person in charge at the office of the
defendant,
(3) the mayor, or the president, chairman, secretary or
clerk of the tax levying body thereof . . . .
Pa. R. Civ. 0. 422(b) (emphasis added)
Here, the plaintiff attempted to serve the Lancaster
County Prison and Sheriff's Department by mailing a copy of the
complaint to Howard L. Kelin at Kegel, Kelin, Almy
Lancaster, Pennsylvania.'

&

Grimm, LLP in

The plaintiff's attempt at service was

improper under the federal and Pennsylvania rules of civil
procedure because a copy of the complaint and summons were not
personally served upon an appropriate person.
The New Jersey Court Rules also provide that the primary
method of obtaining in personam jurisdiction over a 'public bodyu
defendant is to personally serve a copy of the summons and
complaint on the public body's presiding officer, clerk or
secretary, or on a person authorized by appointment or by law to
receive service of process on the public body's behalf. N.J. Court

By letter dated February 2, 2006 (on which the
plaintiff was cc'd), Mr. Kelin informed the Court that he had been
appointed Interim Special Counsel to Lancaster County, but was not
Advanced
Media
Group re RICO to receive
Page 108 ofservice
112
an agent
duly
authorized
of process. July 9, 2006
6

R. 4 :4-4(a)(1) and (8).

service
by mail,
but
15-3400
Lambert Appeal
re RICO Act

New Jersey permits plaintiffs to make

provides
mail is
only
Page
Page 111
111that
of
of 165
165 service by Monday,
January
04, 2016

effective if the defendant answers the complaint or otherwise
appears in response thereto.

If defendant does not answer or

appear within 60 days following mailed service, the plaintiff must
make personal service. N.J. Court R. 4:4-4(c).
The plaintiff attempted to serve the Stone Harbor Police
Department by mailing the complaint to Michael Donahue, an attorney
at law in Stone Harbor, New Jersey, on January 17, 2006.

The

plaintiff also attempted to serve the Avalon Police Department by
mailing the complaint to Stephen Basse, an attorney at law in
Vineland, New Jersey, on that date.

The plaintiff's attempts to

make service by mail were ineffective under federal or New Jersey
law because neither the Stone Harbor or Avalon Police Departments
have answered or otherwise responded to the complaint in well over
60

days.

Moreover, the plaintiff has not shown that Mr. Donahue or

Mr. Basse are the appropriate persons to receive service for these
public bodies.

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 109 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

-*"

Page
Page 112
112 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

r.v..,

consdderation of the plaintitrr8 Sot%ca for C O ~ C ~ (DOC.
Q ~ .
2 2 ) . IT IS

I

HEREBY ORDERED that the c

supense until ~ a y ' a l ,2006.
\t. '
"

!

.

>
7

1.

,

-.,+
-.,
.'.,

\ >
"

8-

'

BY THE COURT:

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 110 of 112

July 9, 2006

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act Page
Page 113
113 of
of 165
165

STANLEY J. CATERBONE

Monday, January 04, 2016

CIVIL ACTION

v.
LANCASTER COUNTY PRISON.
NO. 05-2288

FilEP JUN 19 20M

ORDER
. .

.

~..-

.. .

. ~~.
.

-~

~

.

~

.~~

--

.

.

AND NOW, this 19th day of June, 2006, upon

consideration of the plaintiff's reply brief in support of his
motion for an ex parte meeting with the Court, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that, to the extent that the plaintiff is requesting

leave to file an amended complaint: 1) the request shall be
deemed a motion to file an amended complaint; and 2 ) the motion
is GRANTED.

Although the Court dismissed many of the claims in

the original complaint as time-barred, and the plaintiff has not
attached a proposed amended complaint to demonstrate that he will
be able to cure the deficiencies in the original complaint, the
plaintiff is entitled to amend his pleadings once as a matter of
course before a responsive pleading is served.

Fed. R. Civ. P.

15(a); Shane v. Fauver, 213 F.3d 113, 115 (3d Cir. 2000). NO
responsive pleading has yet been filed in this case.

BY TEE COURT:

JUN 1 9 2006

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 111 of 112

CLERK OF C O U H ~

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 114
114 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Advanced Media Group
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 17516
May 26, 2006

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Honorable Judge Mary A. McLaughlin
Room # 13614
601 Market Street, Room 2609
Philadelphia, PA 19106-1748
Fax: (215) 597-6390 600
Re:
Civil Action No. 05-2288
Honorable Judge Mary A. McLaughlin:
Attached is evidence of a widespread effort to obstruct justice and deny me fair access and due process concerning my current
pending litigation before your court and other matters before other courts. I filed a Forma Pauperis in The Court of Common
Pleas of Lancaster County relating to obstruction of justice. The Judge denied my request, without a reason, contrary to rule
240, and the courts have left me without any access to the courts because I do not have any funds available to file an appeal.
I am having difficulty conducting my affairs and am seeking the courts to protect my constitutional rights relating to these
matters.
I am unsure of the formal and technical manner to file such a motion and request. Please advise.
Respectfully,

Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se
Advanced Media Group
Cc:

Honorable Judge Thomas M. Twardowski,
United States Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
400 Washington Street
Reading, PA 19601
Re:
Case No. – 05-23059
The Honorable Anita Brody
US District Court For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
600 Market Street
Room 7613
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Fax 1-215-580-2356
Re:
Case No. CA 06-1538
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
infor@amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
717.731.8184 Phone
717.427-1621 Fax

Advanced Media Group re RICO

Page 112 of 112

July 9, 2006

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Advanced Media
Medi Group
GroupPress
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page 115
115 of
of 165
165

Page
Page11ofof51
51

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday, December 17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 116
116 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016
scaterbone@live.com

https://www.scribd.com/stan5j.5caterbone

Stan J. Caterbone
Advanced Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
(717)669-2163

PRESS RELEASE
Saturday, July 4, 2015
Lancaster, Pennsylvania, Advanced Media Group and Stan J. Caterbone Proposed ORGANIZED
STALKING AND DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS HARASSMENT BILL to Pennsylvania House of
Representative Mike Sturla (Lancaster, Pennsylvania) and City of Lancaster Mayor Richard Gray.
The draft legislation is the work of Missouri House of Representative Jim Guest, who has been
working on helping victims of these horrendous crimes for years. The bill will provide protections to
individuals who are being harassed, stalked, harmed by surveillance, and assaulted; as well as
protections to keep individuals from becoming human research subjects, tortured, and killed by
electronic frequency devices, directed energy devices, implants, and directed energy weapons.
Stan J. Caterbone has been a victim of organized stalking since 1987 and a victim of electronic and
direct energy weapons since 2005. He has also been telepathic since 2005. Stan J. Caterbone will
help introduce measures that also pertain to remote viewing; mental telepathy and synthetic
telepathy in more detail. Personal accounts of his pain and torture are also filed in various United
States federal and state courts.
We are urging you to contact your local representatives and support our efforts to pass this
legislation. Below you will find the listings of Pennsylvania State Representatives.

For More Information Please Contact Us At: scaterbone@live.com and visit our library of
documents at https://www.scribd.com/stan5j.5caterbone
_________________________________________________
The draft of the legislation can be found on the following page:

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page
Page
12ofof
2
1 51
50
51

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page 117
117 of
of 165
165

Page
Page3
23ofof51
50
51

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 118
118 of
of 165
165

Capitol Office
State Capitol
Jefferson City Mo.
573-751-0246

Monday, January 04, 2016

District Office
Second Street
King City Mo.
660-535-6664

May 21, 2009
To Whom It May Concern,

This letter is to ask for your help for the many constituents in our country who are being affected unjustly
by electronic weapons torture and covert harassment groups. Serious privacy rights violation and physical
injuries have been caused by the activities of these groups and their use of so-called non-lethal weapons on
men, women, and even children.
I am asking you to play a role in helping these victims and also stopping the massive movement in the use
of Veri-chip and RFID technologies in tracking Americans.
Long before Veri-chip was known we were testing these devices on Americans, many without their
knowledge or consent.
There are new revelations of the cancer risk besides the privacy and human rights problems with the use of
Veri-chip and RF signals.
I am asking for your help in stopping these abuses and aiding those already affected.

Sincerely,
Rep. Jim Guest

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page4
34ofof51
50
51

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 119
119 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Organized Stalking and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons Bill

Section 1. Short Title This bill may be cited as the “Organized Stalking and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons
Bill”””
Section 2. Findings and Purpose
A) Findings
1) The constitution guarantees the right of the people to be secure in their person. The Declaration
of Independence asserts as self-evident that all men have certain inalienable rights and that among
these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
2) As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in 1928, “the framers of the Constitution sought
"to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions, and their sensations." It is for
this reason that they established, as against the government, the right to be let alone as "the most
comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men.“
3) The first principle of the Nuremberg Code states that with respect to human research, the
voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. The Nuremberg Code further
asserts that such consent must be competent, informed, and comprehending.
4)There are current regulations implementing the obligations of the United States to adhere to
Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and other Forms of Cruel, Inhumane or
Degrading Treatment including all terms that are Subject to any reservations, understandings,
declarations, and provisions contained in the United States Senate resolution of ratification of the
Convention.
B) Purpose
To establish regulations and penalties for those who use any type of electronic frequency devices,
directed energy devices, implants, surveillance technology, and directed energy weapon to
purposefully cause any of the following: stalking, harassing, mental or physical harm, injury,
harmful surveillance, torture, diseases, and death to any United States citizen.
Section 3. Organized Stalking
If two or more persons willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follow or willfully and maliciously
harass another person and who make a credible threat with the intent to place that person in
reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or her immediate family, they are guilty of
the crime of organized stalking, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one
year, or by not more than one thousand dollars ($ 1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment,
or by imprisonment in a federal prison.
If two or more persons violate subdivision (a) when there is a temporary restraining order,
injunction, or any other court order in effect prohibiting the behavior described in subdivision (a)
against the same party, they shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three,
or four years.
For the purposes of this section, "harass" means engages in a knowing and willful course of
conduct directed at a specific person that seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the
person, or damages his personal property or possessions and that serves no legitimate purpose. *
**

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page
Page
45ofof
5
2 51
50
51

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 120
120 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016
For the purposes of this section, "course of conduct" means two or more acts occurring over a
period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected
activity is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct."
For the purposes of this section, "credible threat" means a verbal or written threat, including that
performed through the use of an electronic communication device, or a threat implied by a pattern
of conduct or a combination of verbal, written, or electronically communicated statements and
conduct, made with the intent to place the person that is the target of the threat in reasonable fear
for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family, or personal property or possessions and
made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who is the target
of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family or personal
property or possessions. It is not necessary to prove that the defendant had the intent to actually
carry out the threat. The present incarceration of a person making the threat shall not be a bar to
prosecution under this section. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the
meaning of "credible threat."
For purposes of this section, the term "electronic communication device" includes, but is not limited
to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or synthetic
telepathy devices.
The sentencing court also shall consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any
contact with the victim, that may be valid for up to 10 years, as determined by the court. It is the
intent of the Legislature that the length of any restraining order be based upon the seriousness of
the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and his
or her immediate family.
For purposes of this section, "immediate family" means any spouse, parent, child, any person
related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any other person who regularly
resides in the household, or who, within the prior six months, regularly resided in the household.
Section 4. Punishment for threats
Any person or persons who willfully threatens to commit a crime which will result in death or great
bodily injury to another person, with the specific intent that the statement, made verbally, in
writing, or by means of an electronic communication device, is to be taken as a threat, even if
there is no intent of actually carrying it out, which, on its face and under the circumstances in
which it is made, is so unequivocal, unconditional, immediate, and specific as to convey to the
person threatened, a gravity of purpose and an immediate prospect of execution of the threat, and
thereby causes that person reasonably to be in sustained fear for his or her own safety or for his or
her immediate family's safety, shall be punished by imprisonment in a federal prison not to exceed
one year..
For the purposes of this section, "immediate family" means any spouse, whether by marriage or
not, parent, child, any person related by consanguinity or affinity within the second degree, or any
other person who regularly resides in the household, or who, within the prior six months, regularly
resided in the household.
"Electronic communication device" includes, but is not limited to, telephones, cellular telephones,
computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or synthetic telepathy devices
Obscene, threatening or annoying communication
(a) Every person or persons who, with intent to annoy, telephones or makes constant contact by
means of an electronic communication device with another and addresses to or about the other
person any obscene language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict injury to the
person or any member of his or her family, or any property or personal possessions is guilty of a
misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts made
in good faith.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page
Page
56ofof
6
3 51
50
51

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 121
121 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

(b) Every person or persons who makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by
means of an electronic communication device with intent to annoy another person at his or her
residence, is, whether or not conversation ensues from making the telephone call or electronic
contact, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or
electronic contacts made in good faith.

(c)
Every person or persons who makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by
means of an electronic communication device with the intent to annoy another person at his or her
place of work is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand
dollars ($ 1,000), or by imprisonment in a federal prison for not more than one year, or by both
that fine and imprisonment. Nothing in this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic
contacts made in good faith. This subdivision applies only if one or both of the following
circumstances exist:
(1) There is a temporary restraining order, an injunction, or any other court order, or any
combination of these court orders, in effect prohibiting the behavior described in this section.
(2) The person or persons makes repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by means of
an electronic communication device with the intent to annoy another person at his or her place of
work, totaling more than 10 times in a 24-hour period, whether or not conversation ensues from
making the telephone call or electronic contact, and the repeated telephone calls or electronic
contacts are made to the workplace of an adult or fully emancipated minor who is a spouse, former
spouse, cohabitant, former cohabitant, or person with whom the person has a child or has had a
dating or engagement relationship or is having a dating or engagement relationship.
(d) Any offense committed by use of a telephone may be deemed to have been committed where
the telephone call or calls were made or received. Any offense committed by use of an electronic
communication device or medium, including the Internet, may be deemed to have been committed
when the electronic communication or communications were originally sent or first viewed by the
recipient.
(e) Subdivision (a), (b), or (c) is violated when the person acting with intent to annoy makes a
telephone call requesting a return call and performs the acts prohibited under subdivision (a), (b),
or (c) upon receiving the return call.
(f) If probation is granted, or the execution or imposition of sentence is suspended, for any person
or persons convicted under this section, the court may order as a condition of probation that the
person participate in counseling.
(g) For purposes of this section, the term "electronic communication device" includes, but is not
limited to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, video recorders, fax machines, pagers or
synthetic telepathy devices.

Section 5. Assault and battery with an electronic or directed energy weapon
Any person or persons who in the course of organized stalking and harassment, commits an assault
upon the person of another with an unauthorized directed energy weapon shall be punished by
imprisonment in a federal prison for two, three, or four years or by a fine not exceeding ten
thousand dollars ($10,000).
For the purposes of this section the term directed energy weapon is defined as any device that
directs a source of energy (including molecular or atomic energy, subatomic particle beams,
electromagnetic radiation, plasma, or extremely low frequency (ELF) or ultra low frequency (ULF)
energy radiation) against a person or any other unacknowledged or as yet undeveloped means of
inflicting death or injury; or damaging or destroying, a person (or the biological life, bodily health,
Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release
Page
Page
Page
67ofof
7
4 51
50
51
Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 122
122 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016
mental health, or physical and economic well-being of a person via land-based, sea-based, or
space-based systems using radiation, electromagnetic, psychotronic, sonic, laser, or other energies
directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of information war, mood
management, or mind control of such persons or populations; or by expelling chemical or biological
agents in the vicinity of a person.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page
Page
78ofof
8
5 51
50
51

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 123
123 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Richmond council passes resolution
supporting ban on space-based
weapons

May 20, 2015
FacebookTwitterMore
9 comments
The Richmond City Council passed a resolution Tuesday supporting a ban on space-based
weapons after a lengthy discussion over whether individuals are being psychologically
and physically harmed by exotic government-patented attacks from high in the sky.
Councilmember Jovanka Beckles, a member of the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA),
introduced the resolution, saying it begins to address concerns of a Richmond resident
who claims she’s been targeted by “remote transmission” from space-based weaponry.
Others claiming to have suffered physical and psychological attacks traveled from around
the country to speak at Tuesday’s council meeting. One speaker claimed to have been
zapped multiple times right before his testimony at council.
The resolution supports the Space Preservation Act and Space Preservation Treaty
permanently banning “space-based weapons,” even though the legislation first introduced
by Rep. Dennis Kucinich in 2001 has never gained traction in Congress. It appears that
Richmond is the first municipality in the U.S. to take up this lofty issue in more than a
decade. In 2002, the City of Berkeley passed a similar resolution supporting the ban.
Conspiracy theorists believe the resolution is a step toward ensuring secret weaponry
such as chemtrails, which are trails left in the sky by high-flying aircraft that supposedly
emit a chemical or biological agent, can no longer target unwitting citizens. For RPA
members on the council, the resolution is also an anti-war initiative.
RPA members on council, Gayle McLaughlin and Eduardo Martinez, also voted in favor of
the resolution. Vice Mayor Jael Myrick and Councilmember Nat Bates were the final two
yes votes, although Bates claimed he was confused by the discussion.
“I’m going to support the resolution for the simple reason that we have voted on a lot of

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page
Page
89ofof
9
8 51
50
51

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 124
124 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

dumb ideas,” Bates said.
Mayor Tom Butt voted no, saying he believes the conspiracy theory behind space-based
weapons is above the heads of city leaders and has taken time away from more pressing
city matters such as the budget deficit, potholes, and crime. Butt has complained in the
past about the RPA attempting to hijack council sessions to push a radical agenda
regardless of whether the issues are important to Richmond residents.
The mayor also pointed to a signed 1967 treaty banning the militarization of space.
The other dissenting vote came from Councilmember Vinay Pimple, who pointed out that
supporting a limitation on the ability of the U.S. to defend against attacks from longrange missiles might not be wise.
Pimple disputed what he called “knee-jerk” reactions from RPA members who depicted
President Ronald Reagan’s proposed space-based anti-missile program of 1983, known as
the “Star Wars” initiative, as inherently evil. The Cold War initiative was intended to
defend against USSR missiles during the Cold War and was shelved not for the project’s
moral ambiguity but its perceived effectiveness, Pimple said.
The idea behind Star Wars, Pimple said, “is you can knock out someone’s weapons long
before they enter your air space. The U.S. used Patriot missiles to knock out Iraqi Scuds
targeting Israel and Saudi Arabia, he added.
RPA members, however, argued that this issue is not just about war but about the
individuals in the U.S. who believe governments are using futuristic weapons in space for
the purpose of inflicting pain and mind control. Martinez argued that they may very well
be telling the truth. He recalled a science fiction novel he wrote a paper on during college
that predicted truths 20 years in advance.
“It’s easy for me to see that things which are wrong can happen because we have the
wrong mindset,” Martinez said.
Myrick said he supported the resolution because he doesn’t support war.
“The weaponization of space…is something I think is extremely immoral and we should
not be as a nation engaging in,” Myrick said. “Maybe some wars are unavoidable, that
may be true. But whatever we can do to get our country away from that mindset…..that’s
why I support this resolution.”
Amy Lee Anderson, a “targeted individual” who brought the matter to Beckles’ attention,
was thankful that the council took up the issue.
“No where in the United States, no targeted individual can get this support,” Anderson
said. “We just needed one person, one city. Because of that, you all our heroes. We are
dying within because the technology is so sophisticated. It’s hard for someone who has
no experience to fathom it, it’s so sophisticated.”
Related posts:

1. Richmond councilmember pushes city resolution banning ‘exotic’ space-based
weapons

2. Dirty bomb drill in Richmond alarms conspiracy theorists, including Alex Jones
Comments

1. C’mon Richmond Standard….your bias is showing!
Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page
Page
Page
10
910of
of
9of50
51
51

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 125
125 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Stan J. Caterbone
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163

October 10, 2015

Federal Whistleblower
and
Targeted Individual (Victim)
of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
Executive Summary©
Updated on October 10, 2015

I remain,

Stan J. Caterbone

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant, and the Advanced Media
Group are victims of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and has been engaged in litigation in both
Federal and State courts seeking financial remedies and a resolution of his Civil Liberties and
his Constitutional Rights. In 1987 Stan J. Caterbone, while managing the financial firm the he
founded, Financial Management Group, Ltd., Stan J. Caterbone became a Federal Whistleblower
when, as a shareholder, he claimed fraud and misconduct within the international arms dealer
and local start-up International Signal & Control, Plc., Some 4 years later ISC was indicted and
plead guilty to the 3rd largest fraud in U.S. history, some $1 Billion and selling arms to Irag via
South Africa. In June of 2015 Stan J. Caterbone became the Movant in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case No. 5:14-cv-02559-PD for the Habeus Corpus
Petition of Lisa Michelle Lambert. The case is now before the U.S. Third Circuit Court of
Appeals, Case No. 15-3400.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page11
10
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
111of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 126
126 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP, LTD.,
&
STAN J. CATERBONE
Federal Whistleblower (Federal False Claims Act Violation in 1987 re ISC)
Targeted Individual of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
and Directed Energy Devices and Weapons

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
copyright 2009

“Ya know what, I am beginning to analyze this War on Terror and am having difficulty understanding
it all. To me the most effective fundamental fight against Extreme Terrorism is to reduce the motive; or the
Hatred Against America. No one seems to talk about that subject. How do we reduce that Hatred Towards
America and the West?
See, from my perspective, my situation is very disturbing. I mean we have the United States Torturing Me, a
U.S. Citizen for no good or valid reason. I have warned EVERYONE about using my situation to feed this
HATRED towards America.
Low and behold a week or so ago I have had several Muslims sign up as Followers to my
www.scribd.com/amgroup01 online webspace, which I use to post documents. The following being the most
prominent IKWAN Scope, "The Largest Muslim Brotherhood's Scope on the Web":
http://ikhwanscope.net/main/
There have also been several Muslim individuals who signed up as followers around the same time, a week
or so ago. They have also signed up as followers on my www.twitter.com/StanCaterbone webspace.
You must understand, I am a VERY Patriotic Person and live a very patriotic life - I believe in the
U.S. Constitution and Our Founding Father's vision for America; I support Our Military and our
Troops; I believe in the Rule of Law; I am a Practicing Catholic, and have been my whole life; I
Believe in the TRUTH; I believe in Right v. Wrong; Good v. Evil; and finally I believe in God. What
do you believe in?”
Posted on the Yahoo Fulton Bank Stock Message Board, January 7, 2010

Date Updated:

October 10, 2015

Date Completed:
Date Initiated:

July 28, 2009
July 8, 2009

Stan J. Caterbone
Advanced Media Group
scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page12
11
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
212of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 127
127 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

UDATE OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2015
In 2015 Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group had to again return to local,
state, and federal courts. Again the obstruction of due process, the local gang stalking, torture,
trespass, thefts, and the like began in earnest.

From the fabricated Petition for Involuntary

Psychiatric Commitment of April 2010 by Detective Clark Bearinger, until January of 2015, Stan J.
Caterbone and Advanced Media Group had been in seclusion and in a state of rehabilitation and
rest due to the forced medication by Fairmount Behavioral Hospital and Dr. Silvia Gratz.

The

psychotropic drugs reduce your motor skills and put you in an extreme state of confusion.

By

the

end

of

the

summer

of

2010

every

social

media

site,

including

the

www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com website was taken off-line due to the intimidation and
coercion by Detective Clark Bearinger.

In May Stan J. Caterbone had again endured the “Attacks” and “Torture” from the
employees of the Lancaster County Courthouse, and the Lancaster County Government Building.
Then soon after the Residents of Lancaster County engaged in a massive Organized Stalking
Campaign. In addition an extreme Computer Hacking Campaign was initiated and executed in
an effort to again SILENCE Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group.

And Again, the

Lancaster City Police Department took the lead role. As usual Stan J. Caterbone summoned state
and federal authorities for help and assistance, including direct communications with the White
House, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office and
Kathleen Kane, The Pennsylvania State Police, the Pennsylvania General Assembly, several U.S.
Congressmen, and of course the Lancaster County District Attorney's Office.

Since August 1,

2015 the Geek Squad had performed diagnostics and repairs six (6) times due to computer
hacking. On at least 2 occasions the entire hard drive had to be wiped clean and restored.

On June 23, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone was named MOVANT in the 2014 Habeus
Corpus Petition by Lisa Michelle Lambert, Case No. 14:02559 in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after filing an Amicus on the case. Judge Paul
Diamond was presiding since it's filing in 2014. However, the Petition was not able to
be granted and the case was stalled on jurisdictional law based on new and compelling
evidence, or lack there of.

The Amicus was filed to cure that deficiency with direct

witness corroboration to the Prosecutorial Misconduct and Innocence of Lisa Michelle
Lambert.

In fact a working theory was filed that suggested that the East Lampeter

Police Department engaged in a strategy of “Entrapment” that lead to the unfortunate
murder in 1991. This, would of course, allow a wrongful death claim to be filed by the
Show family. The case is now before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 153400. There are three (3) questions that the Third Circuit may rule on; whether to free

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page13
12
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
313of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 128
128 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016
Lisa Michelle Lambert, or grant her her Habeus Corpus, and whether to grant Summary
Judgment to Stan J. Caterbone in all civil actions in both state and federal courts.

Two weeks later, on July 9, 2015, Detective Clark Bearinger filed another fabricated
Petition for Involuntary Psychiatric Commitment. And again Stan J. Caterbone endured 7 days in
the Fairmount Behavioral Hospital in Philadelphia.

However, this time there was

no

MANDATORY Treatment Program Ordered by the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas.
So Stan J. Caterbone continued filing in the courts for assistance and resolution. In August, in a
desperate attempt to stop the local torture campaign, another Emergency Injunction was filed in
the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. On August 6, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone went so far
as to undertake a Professional Polygraph Test administered by Bonnie Lee of Polygraph Solutions
of West Chester, Pennsylvania. The test ended up being 4 grueling hours of torture and a scam of
$600.00.

On July 9th , 2015 a Private Criminal Complaint was filed against Detective Clark Bearinger,
Officer Williams, Officer Binderup, and 2 unidentified patrolman.

The Complaint contained

allegations of torture and abuse at every moment of contact.

The Lancaster City Police

Department were so desperate for retaliation from the Amicus filing in the Lisa Michelle Lambert
case, that they actually broke the door in of 1250 Fremont Street in order to execute the
fabricated 302 petition. The Complaint was denied by the Lancaster County District Attorney on
August 8th . The Complaint is now under a Petition for Review by the Lancaster County Court of
Common Pleas.

On August 17, 2015 another Emergency Injunction for Relief was filed in the Lancaster
County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 15-06985. The Injunction was heard by Judge Jeffrey
Wright, who dismissed it as frivolous. An appeal, MD 1561, is pending in the Superior Court of
Pennsylvania.

In addition, by September 26, 2015 Stan J. Caterbone had been granted Electronic Filing
Privileges in the local, state, and federal courts. This should alleviate the fraud and abuses of the
U.S. Postal Service and the computer hackers.

In 2015 Stan J. Caterbone identifies a trend that suggests that the Lancaster County
community-at-large was subject to either community targeting or community hypnosis.

The

community targeting theory is supported by experts Jullianne McKinney, Cheryl Welsh, and Dr.
John Hall. The community hypnosis theory is supported by direct personal relationships with the
Amazing Kreskin, Samuel P. Caterbone and Stan J. Caterbone.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page14
13
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
414of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 129
129 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016
In September of 2015 Stan J. Caterbone begins to digitize a library of approximately 45
audio cassette tapes from his father, Samuel P. Caterbone. The tapes range in date from 1971 to
1996. The tapes prove an identical targeting campaign against both Samuel P. Caterbone and
Stan J. Caterbone.

In addition the tapes confirm that Steven P. Caterbone, brother of Stan J.

Caterbone, was most likely a target dating back to the early 1960's. In addition, the death of
Samuel P. Caterbone on July 20, 2001 was confirmed to be that of murder, not natural causes.

In the early 1990's Dr. Phillip Caterbone, brother, had been solicited by the National
Institute of Health, or NIH in Washington, D.C., for a fellowship to research and catalog a study to
find a genetic marker for depression in the CATERBONE family.

Phil interviewed all living

descendants and relatives of my father, Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., and took blood samples. I am
alleging that this was a deliberate act to continue the cover story of mental illness to distract and
provide plausible deniability for any linkage to U.S. Sponsored Mind Control.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page15
14
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
515of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 130
130 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

HISTORY
In 1987 Stan J. Caterbone went public with allegations of fraud within International Signal
and Control, or ISC as they were commonly referred.

After discussions with ISC and United

Chem Con officials (an ISC/James Guerin straw company), and as a shareholder of record since
1983 of ISC, Stan J. Caterbone had a meeting with an ISC executive on June 23, 1987, which
resulted in a 22 year legal odyssey. The discussions involved a joint venture with his company,
Financial Management Group, Ltd., or FMG, Ltd., but ended in disclosure of his recent public
allegations of fraud. Four years later, ISC founder and chairman James Guerin, and other officials
and companies pleaded guilty to a $1 Billion Dollar Fraud and export violations including the
selling of arms through South Africa to Iraq and Sadaam Hussein.

However, money, power,

influence and public corruption had been used to cover-up the activities and Federal False Claims
Act violations of Stan J. Caterbone for the next eighteen years. There ensued a total blockade of
all United States Courts for all redress and remedy available in accordance with federal, state, and
local laws.

This included recovery of his business interests; intellectual property; real estate;

personal and business real property; his unblemished and impressive reputation; and his most
valuable asset - the ability to produce income. This might be legally referred to as the Right-ToWork under federal statutes.

Notwithstanding, Stan J. Caterbone has never made a bad

investment or developed a business that did not make a profit over the next 22 years.

This

includes two real estate properties that were illegally seized through foreclosure proceedings.

Since 1987 Stan J. Caterbone has been a prisoner and enemy of the state.

ISC was a

Department of Defense (DOD) Contractor and a partner with United States Intelligence Agencies
since it's beginings in the early 1970's. One of it's first contracts was Project X with the National
Security Agency or NSA of Ft. Meade, Maryland.
In summary, the following are facts and part of the public record regarding
SIGNAL & CONTROL OR ISC:

INTERNATIONAL

Once the third (3rd) largest employer in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, with
over 5,000 employees.

James Guerin, founder and CEO was once the largest philanthropist to charitable
organizations in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

The ISC/Ferranti Scandal was the third (3) largest white-collar fraud within the United
States as of 1992.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page16
15
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
616of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 131
131 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

The following are some of the public officials and politicians associated with ISC:
George H.W. Bush, former U.S. President, and Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA).

Robert Gates, former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and current
Secretary of Defense.

Bobby Ray Inman, former Board of Directors if ISC, former Director of the NSA, and
currently associated and directly involved with Mind Control Research organizations.

Alexander Haig, former U.S. Secretary of State, and ISC lobbyist and Board of
Directors?

Joseph McDade, former Pennsylvania House of Representative and Chair of the
Appropriations Committee who was later investigated for the United Chem Con
scandal.

Carlos Cardoen/Cardoen Industries, a joint venture partner with ISC and arms
merchant for the cluster bomb who eventually sold to Iraq and other Middle Eastern
Countries under U.S. sanctions.

ISC was credited with the design of the cluster bomb, and has patents filed in the U.S.
Patent Office.

In 1987 ISC completed the merger with the 3rd largest defense contractor of Great
Britain, Ferranti International; who paid $1 billion dollars for ISC and all of it's
subsidiaries.

ABC News/Financial Times aired 3 episodes on ABC Nightline with Ted Koppel
regarding the ISC/CIA defense weapons; technologies; and cluster bombs to Iraq
story and lead into the allegations that then nominee for the Director of CIA Robert
Gates was involved with ISC and the selling of arms to Iraq.

ABC News 20/20 aired a story on the ISC/CIA efforts to sell cluster bombs to Saadam
Hussein and Iraq on February 1, 1991 days after the start of the Persian Gulf War I,
with the initial bombing raid destroying a cluster bomb factory built in Iraq by
Carlos Cardoen.

On July 1st and 2nd of 1987 Stan J. Caterbone solicited the legal counsel of Lancaster
Attorney Joseph Roda for counsel regarding, FMG, Ltd., International Signal &
Control (ISC); Commonwealth Bank, etc., and was billed for his services. Joseph
Roda did absolutely nothing but refute Stan J. Caterbone's claims and would not
believe him.

In Clark v. Guerin (CI-1990-0074 Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas),
Lancaster Attorney Joseph Roda represented William Clark, ISC's in-house legal
counsel, and never mentioned any conflict to Stan J. Caterbone in 1987.

In Clark v. Guerin (CI-1990-0074 Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas), James
Guerin deposited $1.75 million dollars into an escrow account at Fulton Bank,
Lancaster, County.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page17
16
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
717of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 132
132 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016
In Clark v. Guerin (CI-1990-0074 Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas),
Christopher Underhill of Harman, Underhill & Brubaker, represented James
Guerin. In 2005 Christopher Underhill represented the Manheim Township Police
Department (05-cv-2288 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania) CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al.,.

In Clark v. Guerin (CI-1990-0074 Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas),
Philadelphia Attorney Joseph Tate represented James Guerin and ISC, and in 2007
Joseph Tate represented Scooter Libby during his federal prosecution by U.S.
Special Prosecutor Fitzpatrick.

THE MANIFEST OF A COVER-UP
Not only did the allegations of fraud within ISC have to be silenced at a time when merger
negotiations were ongoing with Ferranti, but all of the fraud; extortion; public corruption;
burglaries; civil rights violations; anti-trust and intellectual property right violations; lender
liability torts; false arrests; false imprisonments; as well as other civil and criminal activities had
to be covered up and buried in bureaucratic red tape.
uncovered and discovered to this day.

Information and findings are still being

Contrary to popular belief, up until 1996 a grand jury

investigation into ISC was still ongoing. It is not known whether it has closed or not. All of these
activates constitute a RICO crime due to the pattern and organization of the perpetrators. The
pattern and source of the activities can be traced back to 1987, with subgroups changing over
time, but still engaging in the same practices. The following plan of action was followed in order
to perpetrate the cover-up:

Totally discredit Stan(ley) J. Caterbone and any and all allegations in every way
possible.

Fabricate a history of mental illness.
Fabricate a criminal record.
Attach his character and honesty with rumors and propaganda.
Extort and maintain his net worth to $ zero or load him with debts.
Keep him out of any profession and or occupation when and where possible.
Totally isolate him and disenfranchise him from his friends, colleagues, and family
into a life of solitaire.

Somehow persuade the community of Lancaster County to buy into this plan of
action through money, favors, etc.,

Always keep attorneys and anyone remotely involved with the legal community
away at times when efforts for justice are pursued.

When attempts to enter the U.S. legal system arise, isolate, harass, and extort
any monies and/or possessions of value.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page18
17
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
818of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 133
133 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Change the history of events and the truth.
THE COURTS AND THE UNITED STATES LEGAL SYSTEM
For 18 years, (from 1987 until 2005) it has always been fairly easy to keep these issues
from court dockets and judges.

During these years Stan J. Caterbone had solicited at least

twenty attorneys, some from large firms with national recognition in their respective fields of
specialties. Attorneys from New York City to Santa Barbara and San Diego California were visited
and consulted as well as a group of ex FBI agents who specialized in white collar crime that are
now globally recognized. However, the money and influence of persons and entities that wanted
these issues silence always prevailed. The issues were so complex and convoluted, and involved
such high profile politicians and U.S. agencies, it was far easier to state that there was no case, or
their were no claims that would result in remedy or redress. Between the Republican Party and
the Department of Defense, the CIA and the NSA, there was not an attorney that could not be
influenced. The obstruction of justice and due process in this case is most likely unprecedented in
nature and in malice.

However in 2005 that all changed when Stan J. Caterbone appeared as a pro se litigant
representing himself, without any counsel, in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania in CATERBONE v. The Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or case no. 05-cv2288.

This case is still not settled and has been withdrawn by plaintiff Stan J.

Caterbone in October of 2008 after a successful ruling in the U.S. Third Circuit Court of
Appeals (07-4474) in September of 2008. The case will be continued upon the security
of evidence and the cease and desist of obstruction of justice and due process. On May
16, 2005 at the Federal Courthouse in Philadelphia, Stan J. Caterbone filed the case under seal.
One week later in the United States Bankruptcy Court for Eastern Pennsylvania in Reading,
Pennsylvania, again appearing as pro se, Stan J. Caterbone filed a petition for protection under
the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Code, in case no. 05-23059.

These acts of entering the United States legal system with these issues triggered yet
another round of attempts to keep these cases from the courts and judges - Organized Stalking
with Directed Energy Devices and Weapons, built on a foundation of mental telepathy or total
Mind Control.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page19
18
ofof41
50
51
51
Page
919of

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 134
134 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

REMOTE VIEWING; ORGANIZED STALKING; DIRECTED ENERGY DEVICES AND
WEAPONS.
Organized stalking and harassment began in 1987 following the public allegations of fraud
within ISC. This organized stalking and harassment was enough to drive an ordinary person to
suicide. As far back as the late 1980's Stan J. Caterbone knew that his mind was being read, or
"remotely viewed". This was verified and confirmed when information only known to him, and
never written, spoken, or typed, was repeated by others. In 1998, while soliciting the counsel of
Philadelphia attorney Christina Rainville, (Rainville represented Lisa Michelle Lambert in the Laurie
Show murder case), someone introduced the term remote viewing through an email. That was
the last time it was an issue until 2005. The term was researched, but that was the extent of the
topic.

Remote Viewers may have attempted to connect in a more direct and continuous way

without success.

In 2005 the U.S. sponsored mind control turned into an all-out assault of mental
telepathy; synthetic telepathy; and pain and torture through the use of directed energy devices
and weapons that usually fire a low frequency electromagnetic energy at the targeted victim.
This assault was no coincidence in that it began simultaneously with the filing of the federal action
in U.S. District Court, or CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or 05-cv-2288.

This

assault began after the handlers remotely trained Stan J. Caterbone with mental telepathy. The
main difference opposed to most other victims of this technology is that Stan J. Caterbone is
connected 24/7 with a person who declares that she is Interscope recording artist Sheryl Crow of
Kennett Missouri. Stan J. Caterbone has spent 3 years trying to validate and confirm this person
without success. Most U.S. intelligence agencies refuse to cooperate, and the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and the U.S. Attorney's Office refuse to comment.

See attached documents for

more information.

In 2006 or the beginning of 2007 Stan J. Caterbone began his extensive research into
mental telepathy; mind control technologies; remote viewing; and the CIA mind control program
labeled MK ULTRA and it's subprograms.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page10
19
20
20of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 135
135 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

FAMILY HISTORY
If you listen to the propaganda machine and the community of Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania, including professionals, the family history of Stan J. Caterbone goes something like
the following:

Father, Samuel Caterbone, Jr., Schizophrenic who ran out on his family
because of nervous breakdowns while trying to run a small dry cleaning
business.

He traveled the world looking for the Blessed Mother Mary and

Space Aliens. He ended up living in government subsidized housing broke
and with a severe mental illness.

Brother, Samuel A. Caterbone, suffered from the very same illness has his
father, Schizophrenia, who finally killed himself trying to live in California.

Brother, Thomas W. Caterbone, suffered from the very same mental illness as
his brother, Stan J., Bipolar Mood Disorder, who ran a lawn business and
finally committed suicide at an early age.

Stan J. Caterbone, suffered from Bipolar Mood Disorder, or Manic Depression and
had a nervous breakdown in 1987 trying to compete in the financial services
industry. When he has his nervous breakdowns, he always threatens to sue
everyone in court and is deeply paranoid in thinking the whole world is
against him. He always spends all of his money during his fits of mania and
has delusions about his success as a businessman.

The Family History was formulated back in the 1960's when Samuel Caterbone, Jr.,
father of Stan J. Caterbone, became engaged in a black budget mind control program that began
during his service in the United States Navy as a radioman and air gunner.

Samuel Caterbone,

Jr., was most likely a direct product of MK ULTRA or one of it's subprograms. His brother, Samuel
A. Caterbone, was most likely part of the LSD experiments of MK ULTRA. Stan J. Caterbone is
most likely part of a program sponsored by the Department of Defense Agencies, such as DARPA
or the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The facts of Stan J. Caterbone's intimate discussions
with both his father and brother over the years before they died, the totality of documents that
were preserved in their estate, including service records; letters; official court papers; high school
documents; and the like - all will prove that they were in fact part of MK ULTRA or one of it's
subprograms.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page11
20
21
21of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 136
136 of
of 165
165
The following are the facts and the real record of the family history:

Monday, January 04, 2016

Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., (Father) served in the Navy from 1943 to 1946 and
graduated with honors from Air Gunners School in Jacksonville, Florida. He was an exceptional
student/athlete while attending Lancaster Catholic High School, participating in the band as well
as sports. He was also his senior class secretary/treasurer. After the Navy, he went on to build a
successful dry cleaning business, which he is credited with inventing a filtration system for the
solvents.

He also developed a very good investment in real estate along the Manheim Pike,

owning several properties. By his own writings and from his personal accounts to me, he was
definitely a remote viewer or data miner for some U.S. Agency with telepathic abilities.

His

viewing is documented to have begun back in the early 1970's. He also suffered from organized
stalking, and was considered an enemy and prisoner of the state. Back in the 1960's, he was a
world traveler, this is documented by his passports. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., may have been a
covert carrier for someone in intelligence. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., had his mental health history
laced with electro shock therapy. Electro Shock Therapy Experiments is another subprogram of
MK ULTRA. In addition, and especially disturbing is his criminal record with the Lancaster City
Police Department and the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas.

In 1973 Samuel P.

Caterbone, Jr. was convicted of forging a 2 checks from the Caterbone Cleaners, Inc., checking
account.

The one check to Joe the Motorists Store at the Manor Shopping Center was never

entered into evidence, it was for a total of $70.00. The other check was made out to Lancaster
Attorney James Coho for $200.00 with "divorce proceedings" written in the memo. This was his
only criminal record. Samuel P. Caterbone, Jr., was sentenced to one year probation by President
Judge William Johnstone.

However, on August 29, 1973 after nine months, Judge Johnstone

wrote an ORDER releasing him from probation and ordering him to "leave the vicinity of the
County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania". The President Judge of Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas literally threw my father out of Lancaster County for forging 2 checks from his own
corporation. In 1987 I was arrested for stealing my own files from my own company, Financial
Management Group, Ltd., You can research the life of Candy Jones and Kate O'Brien to learn more
on this topic. Samuel Caterbone, Jr., has left enough writings and documentation to know that his
life fits the model for targeted individuals, complete with economic ruin, isolation, disenfranchised
from family and friends, and of course a fabricated mental illness history. You can view most of
his record online.

On or about May 18, 2001 Samuel P. Caterbone Jr., finally received an

inheritance from his mother's (Mary Caterbone) estate.

The check was for some $70,000.00.

The estate was probated in November of 2000. Some two weeks later, on Memorial Day Weekend
of 2001, he had called me to come to New York City to help care for him.

He was in perfect

health until this time. In a matter of six (6) weeks he had succumbed to lung cancer. As per
Julianne McKinney,

former intelligence officer for the U.S. Army and victim activist of U.S.

Sponsored Mind Control, the weapons are lethal enough to kill and “the one thing that I worry

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page12
21
22
22of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 137
137 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016
about is that of dying of cancer” (paraphrase). There is no doubt now that my father's death was
a murder, not natural.

Samuel A. Caterbone, (Brother) served in the United States Air Force in 1968 to 1970.
In 1991, Stan J. Caterbone accused the United States Government of using his brother, Samuel
A. Caterbone for part of the LSD experiments on mind control, or MK ULTRA. A notarized letter of
October 23, 1991 was sent certified mail to the California Attorney General on the subject matter,
with a return letter from the California Attorney General on January 14, 1992.

By his own

admission before his death, Samuel A. Caterbone disclosed to Stan J. Caterbone of the "bad LSD"
trips while in the Air Force. Since his death of December 25, 1984, Stan J. Caterbone and others
questioned the classification of suicide, and made allegations of foul play that was ultimately
responsible for his death. Finally in a meeting in Santa Barbara, California with the Santa Barbara
Public Guardian's Office, an office admitted that the death was more likely due to foul plan than
suicide.

Samuel A. Caterbone was also an exceptional student and athlete while attending

Lancaster Catholic High School.

After playing varsity football as a sophomore, he had an

unfortunate accident while deer hunting the following November.

While in the woods in

Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, his hunting pants caught fire trying to stay warm.

It left him in the

Lancaster General Hospital for months, going through painful skin grafts and isolation.
hunting accident interrupted his athletic career and scared his legs for life.

The

The Schizophrenia

diagnosis was a combination of LSD flashbacks and organized stalking and harassment.

Thomas P. Caterbone, (Brother) had an unfortunate transaction at Fulton Bank that set
a course of action that resulted in a suicide. Although diagnosed with Bipolar Disease and Manic
Depression -- embezzled and extorted monies were most likely the reason for his suicide in 1996.
Fulton Bank was involved in a fraud that took $72,000 from a real estate settlement closing and
lead to his total financial ruin and collapse in June of 1995. The funds were never recovered and
Fulton Bank is a defendant for a wrongful death claim in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania in CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., 05-cv-2288.
FULTON BANK triggered a severe and lethal death blow to Thomas P. Caterbone, and as of this
day has refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing or remorse. Thomas P. Caterbone was also an
exceptional athlete. Playing for Lancaster Catholic High School, Franklin and Marshall College, the
Harrisburg Patriots, and even the Philadelphia Eagles. Tom also coached football at J.P. McCaskey
and Franklin and Marshall College.

Thomas P. Caterbone had a very successful lawn and

landscaping business before joining forces with John DePatto of United Financial Services and
selling residential mortgages.

John DePatto was the former head of Parent Bank, owned by

James Guerin and ISC. Parent Bank, owned by ISC also foreclosed on 2323 New Danville Pike,
Conestoga, Pennsylvania in 1988, which was owned by Stan J. Caterbone. Thousands of dollars
of equity was extorted in the process, despite still being short sold for a profit to Mr. Keith

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page13
22
23
23of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 138
138 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016
Kirchner, an executive of Lancaster Newspapers and former graduate of Lancaster Catholic High
School.

Stan J. Caterbone is a remote viewer (at least one way in), is telepathic, and a
federal whistleblower with an exceptional entrepreneurial record in spite of all of his adversaries
and their assaults. In spite of the U.S. Sponsored mind control and torture, he has endured and
will prevail. Legally, Stan J. Caterbone has been able to preserve his claims, and progress his
legal challenges and claims through both the federal and state court system appearing pro se,
without the aid or expense of additional legal counsel. Some of his claims and briefs will most
likely be landmark decisions in years to come. Stan J. Caterbone was a 2-Sport MVP at Lancaster
Catholic High School, in both football and track. Stan J. Caterbone never received less than a B
grade in his four years of high school and had an 87+ average. Stan J. Caterbone excelled in
computer technologies, taking his first full term course in 1975, while in high school and
continuing into college at Millersville University, graduating with a degree in business
administration in 1980.

Stan J. Caterbone excelled profoundly at building his companies, first

beginning with Financial Management Group, Ltd., then working with Tony Bongiovi of Power
Station Studios and the "Digital Movie"; then building Advanced Media Group, Ltd..

Over the

years, despite the illegal seizures and foreclosures, Stan J. Caterbone has amassed a portfolio of
impressive real estate deals that have always paid off in profits, no matter how or when they
were sold.

The same was true of his businesses.

Financial Management Group, Ltd., was a

$20,000 dollar investment in 1986 and was still sold for approximately $100,000 two years later,
despite the false arrests and the extortion of most of it's real value and equity.

The mental health history and the criminal records were completely fabricated, and a
close review and investigation into the actual court records and hospital records can prove that in
very short fashion.

There are TWO (2) ways to quickly dispute the Mental Health History and

Record:
One - Review the word "Delusional; delusions; etc.,;

every instance of the word

used by mental health professionals, and the false reports by friends and family were associated
with facts, and matters of the official record, the complete opposite of the meaning of the word
"delusional". And they still exist to this very day.
Two - Review the 3 Fabricated Suicide Allegations of the following dates: August
10(?), 1987 at Burdette Tomlin Hospital (Cape May County New Jersey); February 18th(?), 2005
by Kerry Egan and the Southern Regional Police Department; and July 19, 2009 for the 302
Commitment by the Lancaster City Police Department at Lancaster General Hospital.
The Criminal Record is very similar, since 1987 Stanley J. Caterbone has had 31 false
arrests; formal charges and convictions dismissed prior to court proceedings or won on summary
appeals in the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania; most of which Stan J. Caterbone appearing as

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page14
23
24
24of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
Page
Page 139
139 of
of 165
165
Monday, January 04, 2016
pro se (representing himself). These have resulted in civil complaints filed in 2008 in CATERBONE
v. The County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania.

THE PUBLIC RECORD
The Public Record is comprised of court filings and exhibits in U.S. Federal Courts;
Pennsylvania State Courts; and the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. In all some 40,000
pages of documents are now filed and electronically scanned or microfilmed in prothonotary
offices. In addition in both the U.S. Federal Courts and the Lancaster County Court of Common
Pleas there are more than 11 hours of audio recordings; some 3,000 scanned images; and
several video broadcasts of the ISC News broadcasts all stored on a CD-ROM and filed as an
exhibit to some of the law suits filed by Stan J. Caterbone and Advanced Media Group, as
plaintiffs. Stan J. Caterbone has over 100 court docket sheet numbers in federal, state, and local
courts.

There are also Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation records; Department of Welfare
and Lancaster County Assistance Office records; Local Real Estate Tax records; Lancaster County
Tax Assessment records; Social Security Administration Benefits records; Lancaster Catholic High
School transcripts; Millersville University transcripts; all for Stan J. Caterbone, in addition to his
court filings.

For Samuel A. Caterbone, my brother, there are United States Air Force service
records; Lancaster Catholic High School transcripts; Millersville University transcripts; Social
Security Administration records; Santa Barbara County Guardian and Public Defender records;
and papers and documents persevered from his estate.

For Samuel P. Caterbone, my father, there are United States Naval records, Lancaster
Catholic High School transcripts; Social Security Administration records; Lancaster County
Assistance Office records; Local Real Estate Tax records; Lancaster County Tax Assessment
records; Samuel Caterbone Cleaners, Inc., corporate records; Real Estate Deeds and Mortgages;
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas civil and criminal records; and of course papers and
documents persevered from his estate

PUBLIC WEBSITE ADDRESSES OF INTEREST:
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
www.freedomffchs.com
https://www.scribd.com

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page15
24
25
25of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 140
140 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED FOR REVIEW
** It is important to note that as of this writing, Remote Viewing has recently
been commercialized by corporate America, and certain Fortune 500 companies are
using Remote Viewers as consultants for trend analysis and market forecasts. This is
often the evolution of most technologies born out of the U.S. Department of Defense.
Top Secret experiments and the resulting technological advancements can stay
secretive for so long.

This has recently been used in a NBC story of the Television

drama "Medium" this last season.

On July 9, 2008 I had recorded an AM radio live

broadcast on WHAN Coast to Coast with a guest that was one of the leading Physicist
turned Remote Viewer and expert that testified to this same notion.

Dated: July 28, 2009
Stan J. Caterbone
Advanced Media Group
scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
The following are no longer in service:
www.advancedmediagroup.wordpress.com
www.scribd.com/amgroup01
www.facebook.com/scaterbone
www.twitter.com/StanCaterbone
www.mcvictimsworld.ning.com/profile/StanJCaterbone
http://www.youtube.com/advancedmediagroup

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page16
25
26
26of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
September 7, 2009

Page
Page 141
141 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Stan J. Caterbone
Advance Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17603
Derrick Robinson
Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance
P.O. Box 9022
Cincinnati, Ohio 45209
Phone 1-800-571-5618
Fax 1-866-433-4170
email: info@freedomfchs.com
Re: Is County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania Ground Zero for Organized Stalking and
Covert Surveillance?
Derrick,
My pleasure. Derrick, I was trying to get group rates at our new Lancaster Convention Center
Marriot Hotel last week, just as a little fact finding mission. I have a theory that I would like to
send your way. I thought it would be very fruitful to bring some TI's together for a conference,
unless you think the exposure would be harmful.
I believe that they try new models for harassment; organized stalking and surveillance on me
here in Lancaster. Remember, Lancaster is now one of the most "Watched Communities" in the
country. "With those cameras, the Safety Coalition will operate and monitor 165 cameras across
Lancaster City — making Lancaster the most watched city of its size in the nation." See article
attached, Watching you: City to add 105 more cameras.
I believe that Lancaster may be ground zero for some of the models of organized stalking and
harassment that we TI's experience and wanted to get some reaction from Lancaster. Some
history on the Lancaster Convention Center. Dale High of High Industries is the lead partner in our
new convention center/hotel. It is first class all the way. Now in the late 1980's I was a joint
venture partner with Dale High in American Helix Technology Company/Advanced Media Group.
American Helix was a cd manufacturer and I and my company Advanced Media Group was the
CD-ROM division of American Helix. I was one of a handful of CD-ROM manufacturers in the
domestic United States back then. Also in 2005 I filed a civil action against the lead hotel, the
Eden Resort Inn, for trying to block the development and building of the Hotel/Convention Center,
see
attached.
Now, some history about Lancaster and the intelligence community. Back in the 1980's there were
several defense contractors located in Lancaster, the main being International Signal & Control,
which I, of course, blew the whistle on a billion dollar fraud and arms to Iraq.
Click here for an overview of ISC.
Click here to see the Lancaster Newspapers Archives regarding International Signal & Control, or
ISC.
Click here to view the live video of the WGAL-TV News Broadcast of October 31, 1991 the evening
of the ISC indictments. The U.S. Department of Justice and other U.S. Agencies held a Press
Conference in the Philadelphia Federal Courthouse to announce the indictments and $ Billion
Dollar Fraud.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page17
26
27
27of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 142
142 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Click here for Part 2 of the WGAL-TV 8 Broadcast.
Now politically, Lancaster is and has always been predominately Republican. Lancaster is one of
the oldest cities in the country and our courthouse was one of the first in this country. Lancaster
has one of the oldest fraternities of the Masons. Lancaster and the George W.Bush administration
has a close and very "interesting relationship". George H. Bush had a very close relationship with
ISC, and of course the NSA and CIA all had a very "close" relationship with International Signal &
Control, or ISC. The following are some transcripts for Ted Koppel and ABC News Nightline
regarding ISC and Arms to Iraq and the intelligence community. The transcripts are contained in
my Amicus for Case No. 2006-cv-2160 filed in the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division.
Now, Robert Gates, presently the Secretary of the United States Defense Department, and his
relationship to Lancaster. First of all, the attached video is the authentic transcript of Robert
Gates' confirmation hearing in September of 1991 for the Director of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA). If you fast forward to approximately 9:00:00 you will see the back and forth
questions from Senator Murkowski to Robert Gates regarding the allegations by several members
of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence regarding his alleged involvement with ISC
and the Arms deals with Carlos Cardoen and the shipping of cluster bombs through South Africa
and on to Iraq. Of course, he denied all of the allegations.
Robert Gates also has relatives that live in Lancaster County, if fact he attended a wedding here a
few months ago, on May 3, 2009 at St. John Neuman Catholic Church in Manhiem Township,
Lancaster County. His wife has a niece that lives in Manheim Township.
Now, I'll give you the ABC News Nightline May 23, 1991 excerpt regarding ISC and the NSA,
National Security Agency:
"It all started legally, if covertly, back in 1974. That's when the National Security Agency, a supersecret U.S. Intelligence unit asked ISC to help complete project X, a chain of electronic listening
posts based at South Africa's Simonstown Naval Station. South Africa was using these posts to
follow Soviet submarine traffic off of the Cape of Good Hope. To ensure secrecy, ISC and the NSA
made sure shipments could not be tracked back to them. They created a company called Gamma
Systems Associates. In fact, this company was nothing more than a post office box at John F.
Kennedy Airport. Gamma was a cut-out. ... But this sanctioned covert operation was stopped in
1977 when President Carter, a strong opponent of South Africa's apartheid regime, told U.S. firms
to stop any military-related business with Pretoria. But ISC continue shipping electronics, some
civilian, some military, to South Africa. The in the early 1980's, South Africa began to intensify its
efforts at ballistic missile development. For ISC, that was a golden opportunity because on of its
top executives was a man named Clyde Ivey, an American electronics expert who has been the
father of South Africa's missile program. Ivey had extraordinary contacts in the nations defense
structure. Begining in 1984, federal investigators say, senior ISC exeutives, including Ivey, began
regular contacts with CIA officials." You can read the rest. The entire transcript of the May 23,
1991 ABC News/Nightline broadcast.
Now remember, George H. Bush was director of CIA. "He served in this role for 357 days, from
January 30, 1976 to January 20, 1977.[22] The CIA had been rocked by a series of revelations,
including those based on investigations by Senator Frank Church's Committee regarding illegal
and unauthorized activities by the CIA, and Bush was credited with helping to restore the
agency's morale.[23] In his capacity as DCI, Bush gave national security briefings to Jimmy
Carter both as a Presidential candidate and as President-elect, and discussed the possibility of
remaining in that position in a Carter administration[24] but it was not to be," according to
Wikipedia.
Now, lets get to Bobby Ray Inman, former Navy, Director of the National Security Agency (NSA),
former Director of International Signal & Control (ISC), and currently part of the Mind Control
industry. The following appears on the Welcome page of my website:

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page18
27
28
28of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 143
143 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

"S.A.I.C. involvement in 1993 American Para psychological Association meeting arrangements, via
their 'Cognitive Sciences Laboratory'. Science Applications International Corporation is a big time
defense contractor, has held the largest number of research contracts of any defense contractor.
Bobby Ray Inman (ISC Board of Directors) is on its board of directors, among others."
by John Porter, CIA Program on Mind Control copyright 1996. In 1994, after Bobby Ray Inman
requested to be withdrawn from consideration as Bill Clinton's first Defense Secretary, his critics
speculated that the decision was motivated by a desire to conceal his links to ISC. Inman was a
member of the so-called "shadow board" of the company which was allegedly either negligent or
approved the exports." by Wikipedia on International Signal and Control, (ISC).
Now, lets list the former Navy personnel:
George H. Bush, former President of the United States, former Director of CIA.
James Guerin, President and Founder of International Signal & Control.
Bobby Ray Inman, former Director of the National Security Agency (NSA) and Director of
International Signal & Control, (ISC).
My father, Samuel P. Cateronne, Jr.
His father, Samuel J. Caterbone, Sr.
George Noory, of Coast to Coast Radio (just anecdotal, nothing assumed or alleged).
George W. Bush flew with the Navy.
James Cross
I will Finish later and add more.

Next we get to Jim Guerin's attorney back in 1989 through at least 1992. His name was Joseph
Tate, of Philadelpha. This link will take you to a document regarding Joseph Tate, James Guerin
and Joseph Roda, Esq., of Lancaster, my former attorney who said I fabricated everything back in
1987. The document contains a letter of September 12, 2005 from Special Prosecutor Patrick
Fitzgerald regarding Scooter Libby, Former Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff. the letter
involves Scooter Libby's Grand Jury Indictment for leaking Covert CIA Operative Valerie Plame
and eventually outing her.
Now in Austin Texas in July of 2005 I was detained by 2 Agents from The Defense Intelligence
Agency. I was merely visiting a Military Museum, that had old and vintage helicopters and
airplanes. near where my brother, Dr. Phillip Caterbone lived. I was visiting on my way to
California. While inside the museum 2 Agents from the Department of Defense Defense
Intelligence Agency escorted me outside to my Honda Oddesey and interrogated me making me
confirm that I was visiting and staying with my brother. They caused a problem for my brother's
Medical Practice by shaking up one of his secretaries. The reviewed my court documents for
CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., Case No. 2005-cv-0288 filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The demanded that I stay off all military bases
before releasing me.
In 2006 I was telepathic with an older NSA executive on many occasions who wanted to meet me
at the Clipper Stadium who told me he wanted to rent a facility in Lancaster for a training
exercise. I told him to to and see Dale High and the High Group for space at the Greenfield
Industrial Park. He said he was retiring and that our discussions were keeping him a few weeks
longer than expected. We had intimate discussions of my history and the Chesapeake Bay Area.
We also discussed Sheryl Crow, and he told me his wife was a fan. I turned him on to her new
album, Wildflower, and he said she liked it. We had to disengage because he was being harassed
by other telepathic assailants.
My former secretary (Susan Bare) at Pflumm Contractors, Inc., where I was controller and was
hired to rescue the company from near bankruptcy in 1993, told me that her husband, Ross Bare,
who grew up just some 10 or so doors from me, worked for the NSA. She disclosed this soon
after I hired her in 1994 or 1995.
I will finish later and add to this allegation. This is a work-in-progress.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page19
28
29
29of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 144
144 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

Stan J. Caterbone
Advanced Media Group
scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
www.advancedmediagroup.wordpress.com
www.scribd.com/amgroup01
www.facebook.com/scaterbone
www.twitter.com/StanCaterbone
www.mcvictimsworld.ning.com/profile/StanJCaterbone
http://www.youtube.com/advancedmediagroup

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page20
29
30
30of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 145
145 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

AFFIDAVIT
BE IT ACKNOWLEDGED, that Stanley J. Caterbone, Financial Management Group, Ltd.,
FMG Advisory, and and all affiliates, Pro Financial Group, Ltd., Advanced Media Group, Advanced
Media Group, Ltd., Global Entertainment Group, Ltd., Power Productions I, Radio Science
Laboratories, Ltd., of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, the undersigned deponent, being of legal
age, does hereby depose and say under oath as follows:

I am now convinced that the situation surrounding my litigation and all factors attributed
to my financial and professional demise bore out of the fact that my Father, Samuel P. Caterbone
was a victim of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control, in the truest sense of the words.

The

whistleblowing activities of 1987 either were a coincidence or I was set up in the very beginning
by Pennsylvania State Senator Gibson Armstrong (former stock broker) in 1983 when he solicited
me to purchase the ISC stock. The preceding would have been the perfect cover story for my
demise; that I was involved in a fraud. Following this analysis would lead one to conclude that
the collateral damage from the activities of my financial ruin always left my fellow businesses in
financial ruin, for example Robert Kauffman and Michael Hartlett, partners, and the shareholders
and affiliated professionals of Financial Management Group, Ltd., Tony Bongiovi and Power Station
Studios, Jim and Lynn Cross as Cross Microwave Consultants, Dave Dering, Scott Robertson, and
James Boyer as American Helix/High Industries, Ralph Mazzochi and Gallo Rosa Restaurant;
Pflumm Contractors, Inc., Mike Caterbone's AIM Wholesaler's Business, Dr. Phillip Caterbone, D.O.
And associated Primary Care Practices of Austin, Texas, Sam Lombardo and Ralph Mazzochi as
S.N. Lombardo Associates for Lancaster Avenue Project, Sheryl Crow Singer Songwriter, my
immediate family, friends, and relatives.

Following this analysis would lead one to concur that the legal and financial remedies
would only be reconciled by the above named parties enjoining my civil litigation. This AFFIDAVIT
is to be considered a legal and binding document to accomplish that remedy.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page31
21
30
31ofof51
41
50
51

Thursday,
Saturday,
Friday, December
October 10,
11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page 146
146 of
of 165
165

Page
Page32
31
32ofof51
50
51

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page 147
147 of
of 165
165

Page
Page33
32
33ofof51
50
51

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page 148
148 of
of 165
165

Page
Page34
33
34ofof51
50
51

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December 11,
17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 149
149 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

scaterbone@live.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
www.advancedmediagroup.wordpress.com
www.scribd.com/amgroup01
www.facebook.com/scaterbone
www.twitter.com/StanCaterbone
www.mcvictimsworld.ning.com/profile/StanJCaterbone
http://www.youtube.com/advancedmediagroup

Stan J. Caterbone
Advanced Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603

ILLEGAL NO TRESPASS NOTICES AGAINST
STAN J. CATERBONE AND ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Violations of Public Accommodations Law re Discrimination
and Anti-Trust Violations with False Statements to Authorities
December 6, 2015
Work-In-Progress
Community Stalking and Organized Libel/Slander Campaign Strategy – Issue a few every
year to support false arrests; false imprisonment; fabricated mental illness history. In addition to
isolate by prohibiting entrance to major entertainment venues with good live music. Prohibit from
defending against the lies and slander in public to a minimum. Also, destroy history of strong
Christian values and church attendance on a weekly basis by keeping away from church. The
Millersville University Graduate Studies No Trespass Notice was accommodated by the denial of
entitled benefits of LETA Job Training Education Course of the Paralegal program at HACC during
the same time period.

1. David Pflumm Properties by David Pflumm – Served by State Constable in June of
2005, original not signed by David Pflumm
2. Eden Resort Inn, by Drew Anthon, Owner – Sent via 1st Class Mail in 2005.
3. Barley Snyder, LLC Lancaster Office, by Shawn Long, Esq., Attorney representing
Fulton Bank in 2006 – Sent via 1st Class Mail
4. Lancaster Newspapers, Inc., by Steve Weaver, Manager in 2006, No Notice,
Corraborated by Jack Buckwalter, Chairman and CEO and George Warner, Atty with Barley
Snyder, LLC, No Formal Notice, allowed to reenter in 2015.
5. Ruby Tuesday, Manor Shopping Center, Lancaster, by Manager and Lancaster City
Police in 2006, No Formal Notice, allowed to reenter in 2015.
6. Alley Kat Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster by Bartender Ms. Santinello, Brett Stabley,
and Lancaster City Police, No formal Notice in 2006
7. Village Nightclub, Lancaster by George in 2008, No Formal Notice
8. Marion Court Restaurant, Lancaster, by Security Personnel, corroborated by Michael
Geesey, in 2008, No Formal Notice, allowed to enter in 2015.
9. Valentinos Cafe, Lancaster, by Jeanine, Bartender,in 2008, corroborated by John
Valentino, Owner, No Formal Notice
10. Brunswick Hotel, Lancaster, by Staff Employees, in 2008, No Formal Notice
11. Lancaster County Library and Duke Street Business Center, by Executive Director in
March of 2009, by 1st Class Mail
12. Anne Bailey's Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster, by Manager in 2009, No Formal Notice
13. Millersville University Graduate Studies and Millersville University, Millersville, by
Lori Austin, Judicial Affairs, via Certified Mail in June of 2009.

Advanced Media
Medi Group
GroupPress
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page35
35ofof51
51

Thursday, December 17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 150
150 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

14. TGIF Friday's, Lancaster, by Manager, in January of 2010, No Formal Notice
15. Lucky Dog Restaurant and Bar, Lancaster, by Robert Donnelly, in January of 2010, No
Formal Notice
16. Saint Mary's Catholic Church, Lancaster, by Don Spica, Usher and Lancaster City Police
Department in Feb of 2010, No Formal Notice
17. O'Halloran's Bar, Lancaster, March 25, 2010 by Male Staff Employee. No Formal Notice.
18. Fulton Bank, Fulton Financial Corporation, March 26, 2010 by Susan Follmer, Security
Officer.
19.Lancaster General Hospital, Gary S. Gehman, MD, May 25, 2010, for recording Dr. Brian
Sullivan of Abbeyville Family Health re U.S. Sponsored Mind Control and posting on my
Wordpress Blog.
20.Tobias Frog Restaurant and Bar, August 8, 2015 by Owner of Establishment, reason
was for complaining of harassment and stalking.
21. Millersville University, July 9, 2015, served notice by Millersville University Police
Chief Pete Anders, for negotiating a civil rights complaint with Assistant to the President,
Debra Hoeckler
22.Village Nightclub, July of 20015, by George..........., Owner, tried to enter several times,
with no reason and no written notice.
23.Lucky Dog Bar, August of 2015, met Abby and Keagan Pflumm outside, went inside and
was told by bartender to leave and not come back.
24.Barley Snyder, LLC Lancaster Office, receptionist Ms. Woods refused to let me
communicate with Attorney George Werner, who in 2011 entered appearance in 05-2288
for Fulton Bank in U.S. District Court.
25.Wennerstrom Property Management Company, June 2015, went to complain
regarding harassment, threats, etc., at 1252 Fremont Street and told to leave building.
26.Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, Nortwest Office Building, November 23, 2015,
Harrisburg, PA, Delivered COMPLAINT re Bars and Restaurants in Lancaster engaged in
Discrimination, Stalking, Harassment, Assaults, etc., Would not allow access to Legal
Counsel, and female who took complaint would not provide ID.

Dated: December 6, 2015

Advanced Media
Medi Group
GroupPress
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page36
36ofof51
51

Thursday, December 17, 2015

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 151
151 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page27
36
37
37of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 152
152 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page28
37
38
38of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 153
153 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page29
38
39
39of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

! "

#

"

Page
Page 154
154 of
of 165
165

Monday, January 04, 2016

$% &
!

" #

$

%
"&#
(

$

'
!

(
,

+

"

"

")

"

""
-

*

)
!
! "
!

!

'
%

" !
"

!
)

+
!

" *
"

"
,

!

,
,

*
%

(

*
(

%
!
/"0

4

,

-

1
1 ,
"
"

4
!

.

!

5

6

)

*

1

"

"
!

!
#
.

.
&,,0
%

!

1 ,

2"3

!

!
)

4

** ! "
&,,..$/

+

4

$

%

+

/

1

2

&,,

3

1

%
&,,
%

4

%

%

&

,

, "

"

00

"

!,

"

5

6
7

8

9

%

:

7 , !
&,,-

8,
:
(

7

)

$;$

"2

! " ,

, ,

!

1

4

?

,

** !

;
5

(

$
!

&,,@

,
.

&<;=

>
1

9
,

%

%

&,,=
$

4

,
>
A

1 B3

.+

&,,=
1 B3

2
>
%

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page30
39
40
40of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

<

)

1
1

* "
!

-

!

)

"
C#

"

%

@

<
*

A
&, ,

24

A

%

#9

9

; "
&,,@(&,,= A
3
24
5
!
%

B

&,,0 4
! %3

!

"

"

1

%

Monday, January 04, 2016

!
&,,
%

"$

3

)

'
5

2

4

Page
Page 155
155 of
of 165
165

.

,

4
D

$

%

%

%
%

"

-

%

""

*

E

,! "
0 =

%

$

0 =9

9
00&9 00

+

,

:
9

&,,-

&, , $
!

%
!
D

%
%

3

$

!

%

%

3

=
F
!

))
+

G

/4

0

),

$

"

;

0 =

/
$

+

F

G
3

%
00

3
3

3

"

H

*

%#
$

$
&, ,

&,,4

!- "

$

D

/

$

%

$

.
&,,@

,
*

3

&,,<
E

.

D

$

.

A

/

+

B

&,,

0

6

,

-) !
/ 4

#

24
/

!

3

D

:

$
D

&, ,
D

3

$
&,,-

&,,0

%
D

A

!
D
D %
7F !
>
!
D

$
A
8F
$

%
;

4

D
.

%
&,,3
E
$

D

3

*
00=; 00

$
5

3

! 7

$

0 =
00

%

.

+

%

%

E

$

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page31
40
41
41of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

F

)
A

F

Page
Page 156
156 of
of 165
165
24
$;$

7

00
(F

7

1

&

$

=

%
B

:

5
00 9

" * <
00=( 00 9

:#

> ) "" ""
$

;3

-

#, " !
&,,-

$

"

"

/
.
$

F

3

G

B
3

D

E

$

3
=

0 =

D

) "

0 =
&, ,

/

0 =

D

24

" "
3

3

.
&,,1

$

%

$

"

D

"
&,,@

" E

""

$

=

)

B
$

<

@

1

&,,1

3

/

/

!

3

#

.

8

.
&,,-

,-(&&
2

Monday, January 04, 2016

$

$

=
@,

"

&,
3

$

,

D

&,,!

$

&,,@

3

&,,@

0 =
@, 1

!

&,,@
9
!
@,

!

#" !,
0 =

!

" "1 ,

"

!

"*

#

)

":

G

.

" E
F

&,,-

!
B

/
!

3

0

"

#

)

00=( 00 9
B
:
9

$
'

3

.
&,,1
9

0 =
&, ,

/
.

3

F

G

00 9

B

$

3

9

9

/
&,,9

A

%

&,

( "

,

!
.

00

$

$
!

&, ,
F

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

3
7

8
!

&,,

&, ,

Page
Page32
41
42
42of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

&

, * "

&&

*#

;!

&<

)

)

:
%

$
&, ,

F

)

"

&:

Page
Page 157
157 of
of 165
165
$
&,,-

!-

4

A

,
5
%

Monday, January 04, 2016

D

!

"

>

$
$

< !-

D

/

3

1

24

? "
;

>

$

&,,0
B

%

$

.

+

F

&,,%
(

$
&, ,

5

%

%

2

%

&-

A
.+ $

-

A

+

&@

*

! :

&,,$

: , *

&, ,

* @

5

!

!

4

6

)

&,,@

"
E

A

3
&,,

"

&,,0

7 "!

4

)

.

7 "
0 =
*

3

&=

$

) "

":

.

)"

&,,@
"

#

&

5

&0

!
< ")
+
9 &,,@
:
9
&, ,
&,,

00

:,

7

!

!6

)

)

"

"

" .
9 &,,0

/

0 = "&#

.

, *

.

;

*

$

!

$

4

&,,@
/

B

" F
0 =

A

;A

0 =
F

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

0 =

Page
Page33
42
43
43of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
3
!
"
$
+
1
!

$
.

Page
Page 158
158 of
of 165
165
!
.
$
.
I $
$
#
'

+

6

Monday, January 04, 2016
0 =

0 =
.
#

"2
J

+$;F
D
"$

&,;&,
3
A

F

00

!

'
$ 24

+

1

$

$

.

#

$

1

1

"1E1# $

K
E
A

+

00&

K

3

>

.

L
F

+

F
B

+

F
+

.

0=,K
A

1

1

$
$

$

$

1

1
+

B

6

$

3

>

B

1
$
>

1

B
!

3
F

1
00
) % 3
&,,-

$

!
>

!

! A !

!

00,K
1 B3
>

F

1

%

F
F
& 1

F
8

7

1

! 4

'
A

.

3

! 4

A
0=,K

F
00,K

0 ,K

4

0<,K

9

4

A

1

3
/

>

%
&,,

F

) %$
D 1

.

4

"
$

0 <9 F

.

4

A

0@,K
0@,K
$

2!

A? D!B
#
*

$
7

+
00

/

D 18

.
E

%

$
M 1
00= E

0 =
%

0 ,K
$

%

0 =

/

%

4

M
00
!

&,,9

(
9

;

!
1

D

$

3

,-(

$

$ !2B+EF2

(&&

!

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page34
43
44
44of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 159
159 of
of 165
165

#

Monday, January 04, 2016

") !

"

7!

N

(

O

O

N
.
!
5
F

4

(
(

5
G
*

A'
, ?
*
? 1
!,
A
(
> "
!, '!

,
B

A
" " * #" !, " "

$C

* #" !, D

,

!

73

8
* 7

,
"

"

&

"
#

(

K

;

2

.
"

#(

K

!

;

5
7
9

9

!

8

9

9

9

9

%

!

%

(

%

'
5

%
7A

8 !

8 !

8

$

'

!
7D .2

O

(

*

O
% 8

'
7

+

(

'

(
(

%

%

!

%

%

%
%

4
K
K

M

M

M %

M

%
K
'

+

-

7E

6

(
8

"

%
'

N

%(

(
(

4
;

!

(
7
7

87

(
(

8
8

- 7 > !,

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page35
44
45
45of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act
!
!
@
E
!
DD
@
E
!
DD
B &. @
DD
B@
. DD
")
!
"
B@
& DD
)
B@
. DD
)
*
B@
& DD
)
!
B@
$ DD
")
!
B@
DD 7
B@
E
DD
"! "
*
. @
EB& DD
!
*
. @
EB DD
")
!
& @
& B DD 6, "
1
B@
DD 5
B@
& DD
B@
DD
)
1
B@
& DD >
B@
DD ' "
!
B@
)
B@

E DD

)
*

%

"E

Page
Page 160
160 of
of 165
165
,
!

*

1
3
1

*

Monday, January 04, 2016
* , "
1"

))

)

"

, "

*"

"
, "

*

!
*

"

*

(

!

")

"

1

*

7
*
)

*
, "
1 ,!
, "
)
!
"
"
!
!
1
"": !
, 1
"": !
"
1
"": !
!
"
! * !
*

;

!"

*

, "

*

)

"

"

)

"

!

1 ,"

DD

*)

F

)

#

!

,

PPPPPPP "

>7

%

!

)

F

%#

'?

4

%

Stan J. Caterbone
# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

"

Stan J. Caterbone
# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

F

"

1

June 19, 2015
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

Pennsylvania
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
$
Lancaster
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
19
PPPPPPP

15
June
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
&,PP

Stan J. Caterbone - I was a notary from '94-'98
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
F
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
SJC
I
.

.

$

/

I
&, ,

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

3

.

Page
Page36
45
46
46of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

.

Don't Know When

24

$
$

/

Q &, , "!
I

#

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 161
161 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page37
46
47
47of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

Page 35 of 41

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,
06/10/2007

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 162
162 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page38
47
48
48of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

Page 36 of 41

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,
06/10/2007

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 163
163 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page39
48
49
49of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 164
164 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page40
49
50
50of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,

15-3400 Lambert Appeal re RICO Act

Page
Page 165
165 of
of 165
165

Advanced Media
Medi Group
Grop Press
Group
PressRelease
Release

Page
Page41
50
51
51of
of51
50
51
Page
of
41

Monday, January 04, 2016

Thursday,
Friday, December
11,
17, 2015
2015
Saturday,
October 10,