January 2010 Archives

Mina Mar Group Inc. www.minamargroup.com/ (MMG) and Mina Mar Marketing Group www.minamargroup.net/ (MMMG) inform the public that the courts ruled in the favour of Mina Mar Group in slander lawsuit against Investors Hub.

Mr. Justice Belobaba, Ontario Superior Court Of Justice awarded judgment in favor of Mina Mar Group, and awarded $75,000 in general damages, $10,000 in punitive damages and $20,000 for the trial costs to the company.

This was never about the money but rather principle. These stock bashers should not be allowed to destroy other peoples reputations and businesses with slanderous and malicious posts on the Internet

The court ruling can be seen on this link http://www.minamargroup.com/stock_bashers.php

Mina Mar Group wishes to quote some key declarations of the court:

    "4... THIS COURT ORDERS that all negative, defamatory and libellous
postings, made by Posters and members of Investors Hub.Com Inc web site are
untrue and are and were made without any foundation nor basis for any of their
content

    5... THE COURT ORDERS THAT the Defendants, Robert Zumbrunnen, Matt Brown
and InvestorsHub.com Inc. apologize and publicly retract the libelous
statements made against the Plaintiffs and that they shall send their signed
retraction to the Plaintiffs and publish the same on the web site,
InvestorsHub.com

    6. THIS COURT ORDERS that Robert Zumbrunnen, Matt Brown and
InvestorsHub.com Inc. provide the names and addresses of the following of its
members and posters:
    Stratey, itlogic, Jim Bishop, Janice Shell, Universal Trader, Rtso,
Livingstyle, Soyelpato, AccipiterO, strongtower, snow, peraire, and Fast Flyer
03, Strongtower, 1 summer, AccipiterQ, bob41, Buckley, soyelpato, greedy
malone, rolltide, marine-1, firelane, (and any other poster who makes
negative, libelous or defamatory statements against the Plaintiffs)
anonymously named John Doe (the foregoing collectively known as "The
Posters"). ..."

Mina Mar Group recently introduced the "Get the Facts Right" statement to our clients, which we remind all of our clients' shareholders to review before taking any advice from a stock board chat room. Most advisors have hidden agendas and prey on the unsuspecting.

Get the Facts Right. The issuer works hard to continue to keep our shareholders informed, and news is updated frequently via Press Releases, Pink Sheet http://www.pinksheets.com/ filings, and updates to our websites. Other websites not sponsored, or recognized by the Company may provide misleading or disinformation to investors in order to manipulate trading patterns for a given stock. Always look for original content from trusted sources, rather than relying on 'excerpts' or discussion boards that may not give you the whole story. The Securities and Exchange Commission requires financial institutions or brokerage firms to provide their clients with documentation, describing the risks of investing in penny stocks.

Vigorous enforcement of the court order including motions for contempt of court for any non compliance will commence shortly in Florida.

SOURCE Mina Mar Group

Don Beebe, former NFL star and wide receiver for the Buffalo Bills, testified before the jury about how his brother-in-law, Dave Walker, has been affected by injuries from a 2007 incident where Walker was struck by a waverunner while snorkeling in the Bahamas. Beebe explained Dave's biggest passion was coaching his son's school football team. "He wasn't one of those coaches that stood over there with a whistle. I mean, he was a hands-on guy. He was going to be out there demonstrating how to do it. Well, now he is one of the guys with the whistle. It's very frustrating for him."

Mr. Walker was represented at trial by attorneys Todd McPharlin and Todd Falzone, partners in the Kelley/Uustal Law Firm, along with Attorney Eric Rosen. "This case was all about responsibility," Falzone said. "Despite being in clear violation of the law, the driver of the jetski refused to take any responsibility at all for the terrible injuries he caused. Thankfully, the Jury served justice and held the driver accountable."

Dave Walker, an Illinois drywall contractor, was snorkeling in 6 feet of water in Paradise Island in the Bahamas just off the beach at the Atlantis hotel when he was struck by Eric Elliot of Miami Beach, Florida. The jury found Elliot to be 100% at fault for causing the collision. Mr. Walker's then 14 year old son, who had been snorkeling at his father's side only moments before, watched in horror as the Waverunner ran his dad over at 25 miles per hour. The impact was so severe that it fractured 2 vertebrae in Dave's upper back, and herniated a disc in his neck, which required a fusion surgery.

Dave's injuries have left him unable to work as a drywall contractor. The business he spent nearly 30 years building with his own two hands is now falling apart. Mr. Walker's attorney, Todd McPharlin, went on to explain, "Dave and his company had become a big part of the community. He was a hands-on dry wall hanger who had a reputation for being honest, hardworking and meticulous. He was a perfectionist who loved and was proud of his work and hoped one day to pass his business on to his sons. Now all of that is gone. He can never do that type of physical work again."

At trial the defense tried to argue that the accident was everyone's fault, except the driver of the waverunner. They asked the jury to blame Mr. Walker, his 11 and 14 year old sons, Mrs. Walker, and the Atlantis resort for negligently causing this accident to occur. Yet despite compelling evidence to the contrary, the only person the defense argued was not at fault was the driver who ran Dave over.

The jury awarded $3,378,729.34 in total damages: $845,000.00 in lost earning capacity, $388,729.34 in past and future medical expenses and $2,145,000.00 in pain and suffering.

SOURCE Kelley Uustal PLC

The California Restaurant Mutual Benefit Corporation (CRMBC) announced today its 4th conviction for Workers' Compensation fraud against an employer member.  Tamisha Carson pleaded no contest today in Solano County court to one count of insurance fraud, charged as a misdemeanor. Carson had been videoed in April 2008 staging an injury at a Vallejo Taco Bell.

Carson had claimed that a box of soda had fallen on her foot while she was attempting to move it.  Video surveillance reviewed by the Taco Bell franchisee, PRB Management, showed that she had in fact placed the box on her foot and called for help.  Intercare, the claims management company working with the CRMBC, denied the claim and launched its investigation through its Special Investigation Unit.  The case was pursued and conviction obtained by the Solano County District Attorney.

Carson will pay $1,255 in restitution as well as additional fines and fees and will be on probation for 2 years.  She will have 75 hours of community service and has been ordered to make at least 7 completed job applications per week and maintain full-time employment once she has a job.

Chair of the Board of Trustees for CRMBC, David Mitchell, said:

"We are stepping up our fight against Work Comp fraud in California.  Small employers are the backbone of our economy but they often don't get a lot of help.  CRMBC is going to continue to drive support to its members for safer workplaces, fewer injuries and an end to fraudulent claims."

SOURCE California Restaurant Mutual Benefit Corporation

Lawsuit Presents Evidence that OMP, the World' s #1 Professional Skin Care Product Company, Has Improperly Attempted to Prevent Consumers from Obtaining Access to Dr. Obagi's Newest Skin Care Line

ZO Skin Health, Inc. ("ZO"), a company formed to give consumers access to world-renowned dermatologist Dr. Zein Obagi's non-prescription skin care products, today filed suit in California Superior Court challenging the anti-competitive practices of Obagi Medical Products, Inc. ("OMP") ( OMPI). The lawsuit presents evidence that OMP, the world's top distributor of physician-dispensed, prescription skin care products, has engaged in a wide range of unlawful activities to prevent ZO from providing the general consumer market with access to the newest anti-aging skin care products invented by Dr. Obagi.

Summary of the Case

Dr. Zein Obagi is a world-renowned dermatologist who has, over the course of his more than 30-year career, invented some of the most enduringly effective anti-aging skin-care products ever. In 1988, Dr. Obagi founded Worldwide Products Distribution, Inc. ("Worldwide"), the company that would later form the core of Obagi Medical Products, Inc. ("OMP"). OMP provides medical skin-care products to doctors for use on their patients around the world.

In 1997, Dr. Obagi sold a controlling share in OMP to outside investors. A Stonington Partners private equity fund acquired a majority interest in OMP and later took the company public. Even to this day, Dr. Obagi's Nu-Derm System, which he invented in the 1980s, continues to be the economic foundation of OMP's business. And Dr. Obagi remains OMP's second-largest shareholder.

Dr. Obagi recently created a new line of anti-aging skincare. His plan is to make these newly formulated--and highly effective--skin-care products widely available to consumers who do not have the need for, or access to, the physician-dispensed products that OMP sells.

Dr. Obagi first offered OMP the opportunity to market and distribute his new consumer product line because these products are designed to complement and enhance OMP's existing physician-dispensed skin-care lines. And, as OMP's second-largest shareholder, Dr. Obagi wants OMP to realize continued success.

After a lengthy round of discussions--during which Dr. Obagi and ZO shared with OMP highly confidential information -- OMP declined to pursue Dr. Obagi's new products. Instead, ZO distributed Dr. Obagi's new consumer product line. ZO has already had tremendous success, with products now available to consumers at Nordstrom and at leading spas, such as Vdara Hotel and Spa at CityCenter Las Vegas.

OMP responded to ZO's success by engaging in a far-reaching and legally improper campaign to prevent ZO from marketing and selling its line of products. In addition, OMP wrongfully scuttled the sale of ZO to a major Japanese pharmaceutical company. OMP has attempted to justify its campaign against ZO by referring to non-compete clauses--clauses that are unenforceable as a matter of California law and contravene OMP's own Code of Ethics.

ZO's goals in filing this lawsuit are (i) to halt OMP's illegal campaign against ZO, (ii) to permit ZO's new products to be widely distributed to consumers without threats and wrongful interference, and (iii) to secure just compensation for the damage that OMP's improper campaign has already caused.

OMP's Bad Faith Negotiations with ZO

ZO Skin Health's lawsuit asserts that Dr. Obagi first gave OMP the opportunity to market his new consumer product line. ZO was then formed with OMP's knowledge and expressions of support. But according to the complaint filed today in court, "despite OMP's repeated promises that it was interested in collaborating with ZO on the development, marketing and sales of the ZO Line, and its requests for trade-secret and confidential business information that ZO accommodated, OMP's actions demonstrate that it never acted in good faith and never truly was interested in collaborating with ZO."

OMP's Unlawful Attempts to Prevent Others from Doing Business with ZO

The lawsuit alleges that OMP prevented distributors from selling ZO Skin Health's products. OMP, according to the lawsuit, "told a Canadian distributor that it could not distribute ZO products because such an arrangement supposedly would violate a non-compete clause in a contract between OMP and Dr. Obagi." The lawsuit also indicates that OMP "prevented ZO from using a distributor in Europe by making the same assertion in bad faith. Upon information and belief, OMP has similarly dissuaded other potential customers from working with ZO." Finally, according to the complaint, "one of the biggest skin-care and cosmetic e-commerce companies signed an agreement to purchase and distribute the ZO Line. Upon information and belief, OMP instructed the e-commerce company that it was not allowed to sell ZO products because of a non-compete agreement between OMP and Dr. Obagi. This company has since refused to sell the ZO Line as a result of the claims and threats made by OMP."

OMP's Improper Reliance on an Illegal Non-Compete Clause

According to the lawsuit, the non-compete clause relied on by OMP is clearly unenforceable because it is "void and against California public policy." In addition, such non-compete clauses violate OMP's own corporate policy, which states clearly that "no agreement will contain any provisions not to compete or to boycott certain buyers, sellers, or competitors."

OMP's Illegal Interference with ZO's Attempt to Sell the Company

The lawsuit also alleges that OMP unlawfully interfered with ZO Skin Health's attempt to sell its business to a Japanese firm, Rohto Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., for millions of dollars. The complaint says that after ZO accepted Rohto's written intent to purchase ZO's business in September 2009, OMP worked to scuttle the deal "by accusing ZO and Dr. Obagi of violating agreements not to compete and threatening Rohto if it were to pursue the agreement. OMP told Rohto that it would refuse to permit ZO to be sold to any other interested company, and would limit any outside investment in ZO to merely a passive investment."

In response to OMP's threats, according to the complaint, "Rohto told ZO that Rohto still admired Dr. Obagi's methods and products, still wished to pursue expansion of the ZO Line throughout the world, and still believed the deal with ZO had great business potential. Nevertheless, Rohto told ZO that it was backing out of the agreement due to OMP's conduct and interference."

Violations of California Law and the Misleading of Shareholders

The lawsuit filed by international law firm O'Melveny & Myers LLP, alleges that OMP's anti-competitive practices violate California state laws, including:

• California Business and Professions Code: "OMP's intentional, bad faith and wrongful reliance on the void non-compete clauses in its contracts with Dr. Obagi to interfere with the economic relationships between ZO and Rohto and ZO and product distributors constitutes independently wrongful conduct in violation of California Business & Professions Code Section 16600. OMP knew these non-compete clauses violated not only California Business & Professions Code Section 16600 but its own Code of Conduct."
• California's Unfair Competition Law: According to the complaint, OMP's actions "constitute unlawful, unfair and/or fraudulent business practices within the meaning of California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL") ... because OMP's anti-competitive behavior is designed and attempts to restrict ZO's ability to market, distribute, and sell the ZO Line. OMP wrongfully and in bad faith relied on void and unlawful non-compete clauses in its contracts with Dr. Obagi, in violation of OMP's own Code of Conduct and California Business & Professions Code Section 16600, in order to: (1) prevent ZO from selling through various distributors; (2) prevent ZO from selling its line through third-party skin care websites; and (3) interfere with the contract for the multi-million dollar sale of ZO's business to Rohto."
• Misleading Shareholders, Customers and the Public: According to the lawsuit, "OMP's actions were fraudulent in violation of the UCL because OMP misled its shareholders, customers, health care professionals, ZO and the public at large by falsely claiming in its Code of Conduct that it supports fair and ethical competition in the marketplace and does not enter into contracts that contain non-compete provisions. In fact, an important part of OMP's strategy is to compete unfairly by using void non-competition covenants to threaten other skin care product developers, manufacturers, and distributors."

Request for Injunctive Relief, and Compensatory and Punitive Damages

The lawsuit asks the California Superior Court to enter preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against OMP's unlawful practices and to order OMP to pay compensatory and punitive damages to ZO Skin Health.

 

SOURCE ZO Skin Health, Inc.