john shaeffer, sbn 138331 fox rothschild llp · pdf fileworldventures marketing, llc, and...

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

NOTICE OF REMOVAL

JOHN SHAEFFER, SBN 138331

FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

1800 Century Park East, Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90067-1506

Telephone: 310-598-4150

Facsimile: 310-556-9828

E-mail: [email protected]

Attorney for Defendants WorldVentures Foundation, WorldVentures Holdings, LLC and Wayne Nugent

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

MELODY YIRU, aka SHI YIRU, an individual, and all those similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v. WORLDVENTURES HOLDINGS, LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; WORLD VENTURES, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; WORLDVENTURES FOUNDATION, a Texas corporation; WORLDVENTURES MARKETING LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; MICHAEL AZCUE, an individual; WAYNE NUGENT, an individual; and DANIEL STAMMEN, an individual; and DOES 1-100;

Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CASE NO.: NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF DEFENDANT WORLDVENTURES FOUNDATION, WORLD VENTURES HOLDING, LLC AND WAYNE NUGENT

Case 2:17-cv-04357-PA-KS Document 1 Filed 06/12/17 of 52 Page ID #:1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL

TO THE CLERK OF THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT, ALL PARTIES

AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441 and 1446,

Defendants WorldVentures Foundation, WorldVentures Holdings, LLC and Wayne

Nugent (“Served Defendants”), hereby remove to the United States District Court for

the Central District of California, Western Division, the civil action styled as


WORLDVENTURES HOLDINGS, LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company;

WORLD VENTURES, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; WORLDVENTURES

FOUNDATION, a Texas corporation; WORLDVENTURES MARKETING LLC, a

Nevada Limited Liability Company; MICHAEL AZCUE, an individual; WAYNE

NUGENT, an individual; and DANIEL STAMMEN, an individual; and DOES 1-100

Case No. BC659422, which was filed in the Superior Court of the State of California,

County of Los Angeles, Central District (the “State Court Action”). This civil action

is removable pursuant to pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1441(a) and pursuant to

28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441(b). In accordance with the requirement of 28 U.S.C. §

1446(a), a “short and plain statement of the ground for removal” is set forth below.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. On or about May 1, 2017, plaintiff Melody Yiru, a.k.a. Shi Yiru

(“Plaintiff”), filed her Complaint (“Complaint”) in the Superior Court of the State of

California, County of Los Angeles, in the State Court Action.

2. On or about May 11, 2017, Defendant WorldVentures Foundation (the

“Foundation”) was served with a copy of the Summons and Complaint.

3. On or about May 26, 2017, Defendants WorldVentures Holdings, LLC

(“WorldVentures”) and Wayne Nugent were served with copies of the Summons and

Complaint.

4. Undersigned counsel is not aware of service of the Summons and

Complaint upon any other defendant named in the State Court Action.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2 NOTICE OF REMOVAL

5. Exhibit 1 hereto constitutes “a copy of all process, pleadings and orders”

served upon the Served Defendants in the State Court Action. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a).

6. Exhibit 2 hereto is a copy of the court’s docket in the State Court Action.

7. Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges that the WorldVentures is a membership-

based travel services business and that the Foundation and Nugent participate in this

business. Plaintiff alleges that WorldVentures is an illegal pyramid scheme.

8. Plaintiff alleges that from 2011 to the present, she and as many as

250,000 other members of her purported class were misled about the financial

structure and likelihood of financial gain from their participation (through initial and

monthly membership fees) in WorldVentures’ business.

9. Plaintiff alleges that, despite what appeared to be truthful and

encouraging Annual Disclosure Statements, the only way to generate income as a

Sales Representative was not through the sales of travel-related services, but through

the recruitment of additional Sales Representatives.

10. Plaintiff alleges that nearly all Sales Representatives lost money through

their involvement with WorldVentures.

11. Based on these allegations, Plaintiff brings three state law claims arising

under section 1689.2 of the California Civil Code (Endless Chain Scheme), section

17200, et seq., of the California Business & Professions Code (Unfair and Deceptive

Practices), and section 17500, et seq., of the California Business & Professions Code

(False Advertising) as well as three federal claims arising under the Racketeer

Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968.

12. None of the Served Defendants has filed an answer or other responsive

pleading in the State Court Action.

13. As explained below, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this

matter based on both federal question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3 NOTICE OF REMOVAL

II. THE COURT HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE CAUSES OF ACTION

ARISING UNDER FEDERAL LAW.

14. Removal of the State Court Action to this Court is proper under 28

U.S.C. § 1441(a) because the State Court Action is a civil action over which this

Court has original jurisdiction founded upon a claim or right arising under the laws of

the United States. Here, the Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims

under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-

1968 (Counts IV-VI).

15. Plaintiff’s Complaint contains three causes of action arising under the

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, (“RICO”) 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-

1968, over which this Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

Count IV of Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(a) arising out

of a purported conspiracy which involved the investment of ill-gotten funds in an

allegedly fraudulent enterprise. Count V of Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges that the

defendants named in the State Court Action conducted their purportedly fraudulent

affairs as an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. §

1962(c). Count VI of Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges a section 1962(d) conspiracy by

and between the defendants named in the State Court Action to violate sections

1962(a) and (c).

16. Regardless of whether a RICO claim is predicated on a violation of state

or federal law, this Court has original jurisdiction over such a claim. See Jean Tech.,

Inc. v. NYDJ Apparel, LLC, 2015 WL 4919974, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2015)

(citing Perryman v. Litton Loan Servicing, LP, 2014 WL 4954674, at *6 (N.D. Cal.

Oct. 1, 2014) (“the Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s RICO claims

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 18 U.S.C. § 1964”).

17. Accordingly, this Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s RICO

claims.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4 NOTICE OF REMOVAL

18. This Court also has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s remaining

state law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) (“[I]n any civil action of which the district

courts have original jurisdiction, the district courts shall have supplemental

jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such

original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy…”).

19. Therefore, removal of the entire State Court Action is warranted based on

the Court’s original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s RICO claims.

III. THE COURT HAS JURISDICTION BASED ON THE DIVERSITY OF

THE NAMED PARTIES.

20. Removal of this action is also proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b) because

Plaintiff’s purported class action claims are subject to the Class Action Fairness Act

(“CAFA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332(d), 1453, and 1711-1715, and because the matter

satisfies the diversity criteria of 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

21. As this Court has held, “CAFA gives district courts original jurisdiction

to hear class actions “in which the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of

$5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs,” and “in which [, inter alia,] any member

of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a State different from any defendant.” Leon v.

Gordon Trucking, Inc., 76 F.Supp.3d 1055 (C.D. Cal. 2014) (citing 28 U.S.C. §

1332(d)(2); Luther v. Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, 533 F.3d 1031, 1033–

34 (9th Cir. 2008)).

22. Further, for CAFA to apply, the aggregate number of members of all

proposed classes must exceed 100 individuals. See id.

23. Significantly, under CAFA, “complete diversity is not required” for the

Court to have original jurisdiction or for the case to be removable to federal court. See

Luther, 533 F.3d at 1033-34 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1453(b)).

24. Here, Plaintiff’s purported class action claims satisfy all of the

prerequisites for the application of CAFA and, in turn, to confer original jurisdiction

over this matter to this Court.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5 NOTICE OF REMOVAL

25. The requirement that the class exceed 100 members is satisfied because

Plaintiff alleges that the “members of the Class are greater than 250,000, nationwide.”

(Complaint ¶ 57).

26. Plaintiff also alleges damages well in excess of $5,000,000.

27. Plaintiff alleges that “99.7% of WorldVentures enrollees average a loss

of -$1057.77 per year.” (Complaint ¶ 48(g)).

28. Based on Plaintiff’s allegation of a 250,000 member class and an alleged

loss of $1,057.77 per member, the total loss per year alleged is $264,442,500.00.

29. As Plaintiff alleges losses occurring from 2011 to present, Plaintiff’s total

alleged damages on behalf of the class are in excess of $1.5 billion.

30. Finally, CAFA’s augmented diversity requirement is satisfied because

there is diversity among the parties.

31. Plaintiff alleges that she is an individual residing and doing business in

the State of California. (Complaint ¶ 7).

32. Plaintiff does not allege that any of the defendants named in the State

Court Action are residents of or incorporated under the laws of the State of California.

(Complaint ¶¶ 8-14).

33. The Foundation is alleged to be a Texas corporation. (Complaint ¶ 11).

34. WorldVentures is alleged to be a Nevada limited liability company.

(Complaint ¶ 8).

35. Nugent is alleged to be a resident of the State of Texas. (Complaint ¶ 12).

36. Further, each of the additional individual defendants named in the State

Court Action is alleged to be a resident of the State of Texas. (Complaint ¶¶ 13-14).

37. In addition, the other business entities named in State Court Action,

WorldVentures Marketing, LLC, and WorldVentures, are all alleged to be entities

formed under the law of the State of Nevada. (Complaint ¶¶ 9-10).

38. As CAFA only requires diversity of one plaintiff and one defendant, the

complete diversity of the parties is more than adequate to satisfy this prerequisite.


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

6 NOTICE OF REMOVAL

39. Accordingly, removal of the State Court Action is warranted based on

the application of the Class Action Fairness Act.

40. In addition, the complete diversity of the parties as pled and the amount

in controversy in excess of $75,000 also satisfies the requirement for removal

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b).

IV. THE REMAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR REMOVAL HAVE BEEN

SATISFIED

41. All procedural requirements for removal have been satisfied.

42. This Notice of Removal is timely as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b),

because it is not filed more than one year following the commencement of the action

and within thirty (30) days of the service of the Summons and Complaint upon

WorldVentures Foundation, the first defendant to be served in this case. See 28

U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2)(B) (“Each defendant shall have 30 days after receipt by or service

on that defendant of the initial pleadings or summons described in paragraph (1) to file

the notice of removal.”)

43. Removal to this Court and this division is proper, insofar as the State

Court Action was pending in Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los

Angeles; and the United States District Court for the Central District of California,

Western Division, embraces the location of the state court in which the State Court

Action was filed. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(a) and 1446(a).

44. This notice of removal is accompanied by true and correct copies of all

pleadings, process and orders on file in the Superior Court of the State of California,

County of Los Angeles. See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a).

45. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), concurrently with the filing of this

Notice of Removal, Served Defendants are serving written notice of the filing of this

Notice of Removal, with a copy of this Notice of Removal attached, upon Plaintiff’s

counsel. Additionally, Served Defendants are filing a copy of this Notice of Removal

(including the materials filed in support hereof) with the Clerk of the Superior Court


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

7 NOTICE OF REMOVAL

for the State of California, County of Los Angeles (the court from which the State

Court Action was removed). See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d).

46. All defendants served with the Summons and Complaint have joined this

removal and have consented to removal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2)(A) (“all

defendants who have been properly joined and served must join in or consent to the

removal of the action”). The Served Defendants are not required to obtain the consent

of parties who have not been properly served. See Destino v. Reiswig, 630 F.3d 952,

955 (9th Cir. 2011).

47. Served Defendants have not previously sought similar relief with respect

to this matter.

48. The allegations in this Notice of Removal are true and correct.

49. Accordingly, this civil action is properly removable to the United States

District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division.

WHEREFORE, the Served Defendants respectfully request that the State

Court Action be removed to this Court and placed on the docket of this Court for

further proceedings as though originally instituted in this Court. If any question arises

as to the propriety of the removal of this action, the Served Defendants respectfully

request the opportunity to present a brief and oral argument in support of their position

that this civil action is removable.

Dated: June 12, 2017 FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP By: _/s/John Shaeffer John Shaeffer, Esq.



EXHIBIT 1


EXHIBIT 2


Case Summary

Please make a note of the Case Number.

Click here to access document images for this case.If this link fails, you may go to the Case Document Images site and search using the case number displayed on this page.

Case Number: BC659422MELODY YIRU ET AL VS WORLDVENTURES HOLDINGS LLC ET AL

Filing Date: 05/01/2017Case Type: Racketeering Case (General Jurisdiction)Status: Pending

Future Hearings

07/14/2017 at 10:00 am in Department 310 at 600 South Commonwealth Ave., Los Angeles, CA 90005Initial Status Conference(file Joint ISC Report by 6/30/17)

Documents Filed | Proceeding Information

Parties

AZCUE MICHAEL - Defendant/Respondent

DOES 1-100 - Defendant/Respondent

LINDEMANN LAW FIRM APC - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

NUGENT WAYNE - Defendant/Respondent

STAMMEN DANIEL - Defendant/Respondent

WORLD VENTURES - Defendant/Respondent

WORLDVENTURES FOUNDATION - Defendant/Respondent

WORLDVENTURES HOLDINGS LLC - Defendant/Respondent

WORLDVENTURES MARKETING LLC - Defendant/Respondent

YIRU MELODY - Plaintiff/Petitioner

YIRU SHI - Plaintiff/Petitioner's DBA

Case Information | Party Information | Proceeding Information

Documents Filed (Filing dates listed in descending order)

05/23/2017 Notice (OF COURT ORDER RE NEWLY FILED CLASS ACTION AND NT OF ISC )Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

05/17/2017 Order (Initial Status Conference Order )Filed by Court

05/03/2017 Summons FiledFiled by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

05/01/2017 Complaint

Page 1 of 2LASC - Case Summary

6/12/2017http://www.lacourt.org/casesummary/ui/popupCaseSummary.aspx


Case Information | Party Information | Documents Filed

Proceedings Held (Proceeding dates listed in descending order)

05/17/2017 in Department 310, Kenneth R. Freeman, PresidingOrder-Complex Determination - Case Determined to be Complex

Case Information | Party Information | Documents Filed | Proceeding Information

Page 2 of 2LASC - Case Summary

6/12/2017http://www.lacourt.org/casesummary/ui/popupCaseSummary.aspx


American LegalNet, Inc.

www.FormsWorkFlow.com

JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEET

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.) I. (a) PLAINTIFFS

Melody Yiru, aka Shi Yiru, an individual, and all those similarly situated DEFENDANTS

Worldventures Holdings, LLC, et al. (b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Los Angeles County of Residence of First Listed Defendant Collin County, TX

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY) NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF

THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED. (c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)

John Shaeffer (SBN 138331)

FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

1800 Century Park East, Ste. 300

Los Angeles, CA 90067 / Tel: 310-598-4150

Blake J. Lindemann (SBN 255747) and Daren M. Schlecter (SBN 259537)

LINDEMANN LAW FIRM, APC Law Office of Daren M. Schlecter, APC

433 N. Camden Drive, 4th Floor 1925 Century Park East, Ste. 830

Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Los Angeles, CA 90067

Tel: 310-279-5269 Tel: 310-553-5747

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (For Diversity Cases Only)

(Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff

and One Box for Defendant)

1 U.S. Government Plaintiff

2 U.S. Government Defendant

3 Federal Question (U.S. Government Not a Party)

4 Diversity (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)

Citizen of This State

Citizen of Another State Citizen or Subject of a

Foreign Country

PTF DEF 1 1

2 2

3 3

Incorporated or Principal Place

of Business In This State Incorporated and Principal Place

of Business In Another State Foreign Nation

PTF DEF 4 4

5 5

6 6

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions. CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES

110 Insurance

120 Marine

130 Miller Act

140 Negotiable Instrument

150 Recovery of Overpayment

& Enforcement of Judgment

151 Medicare Act

152 Recovery of Defaulted

Student Loans (Excludes Veterans)

153 Recovery of Overpayment

of Veteran’s Benefits

160 Stockholders’ Suits

190 Other Contract

195 Contract Product Liability

196 Franchise

PERSONAL INJURY 310 Airplane 315 Airplane Product

Liability 320 Assault, Libel &

Slander 330 Federal Employers’

Liability 340 Marine 345 Marine Product

Liability 350 Motor Vehicle 355 Motor Vehicle

Product Liability 360 Other Personal

Injury 362 Personal Injury -

Medical Malpractice

PERSONAL INJURY 365 Personal Injury -

Product Liability 367 Health Care/

Pharmaceutical Personal Injury

Product Liability 368 Asbestos Personal

Injury Product Liability

PERSONAL PROPERTY 370 Other Fraud 371 Truth in Lending 380 Other Personal

Property Damage 385 Property Damage

Product Liability

625 Drug Related Seizure of Property 21 USC 881

690 Other

422 Appeal 28 USC 158 423 Withdrawal

28 USC 157

375 False Claims Act

376 Qui Tam (31 USC 3729(a))

400 State Reapportionment

410 Antitrust

430 Banks and Banking

450 Commerce

460 Deportation

470 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations

480 Consumer Credit

490 Cable/Sat TV

850 Securities/Commodities/ Exchange

890 Other Statutory Actions

891 Agricultural Acts

893 Environmental Matters

895 Freedom of Information Act

896 Arbitration

899 Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision

950 Constitutionality of State Statutes

PROPERTY RIGHTS

820 Copyrights

830 Patent

835 Patent - Abbreviated New Drug Application

840 Trademark LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY

710 Fair Labor Standards Act

720 Labor/Management Relations

740 Railway Labor Act

751 Family and Medical Leave Act

790 Other Labor Litigation

791 Employee Retirement Income Security Act

861 HIA (1395ff)

862 Black Lung (923)

863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g))

864 SSID Title XVI

865 RSI (405(g))

REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS FEDERAL TAX SUITS

210 Land Condemnation

220 Foreclosure

230 Rent Lease & Ejectment

240 Torts to Land

245 Tort Product Liability

290 All Other Real Property

440 Other Civil Rights

441 Voting

442 Employment

443 Housing/ Accommodations

445 Amer. w/Disabilities- Employment

446 Amer. w/Disabilities- Other

448 Education

Habeas Corpus: 463 Alien Detainee

510 Motions to Vacate Sentence

530 General

535 Death Penalty

Other: 540 Mandamus & Other

550 Civil Rights

555 Prison Condition

560 Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement

870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or Defendant)

871 IRS—Third Party 26 USC 7609

IMMIGRATION

462 Naturalization Application

465 Other Immigration Actions

V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only) 1 Original

Proceeding 2 Removed from

State Court 3 Remanded from

Appellate Court 4 Reinstated or

Reopened 5 Transferred from

Another District

(specify)

6 Multidistrict Litigation- Transfer

8 Multidistrict

Litigation - Direct File

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION

Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):

18 U.S.C. § 1962 Brief description of cause:

RICO

VII. REQUESTED IN

COMPLAINT:

CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.

DEMAND $

1,500,000,000 CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

JURY DEMAND: Yes No

VIII. RELATED CASE(S)

IF ANY (See instructions):

JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

DATE June 12, 2017 SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD /s/John Shaeffer FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Case 2:17-cv-04357-PA-KS Document 1-1 Filed 06/12/17 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:53

http://www.formsworkflow.com/

http://www.uscourts.gov/forms/civil-forms/civil-cover-sheet

American LegalNet, Inc.

www.FormsWorkFlow.com

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17)

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as

required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is

required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of

Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use

only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and

then the official, giving both name and title.

(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the

time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land

condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)

(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting

in this section "(see attachment)".

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"

in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below. United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.

United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box. Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment

to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes

precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked. Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the

citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity

cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this

section for each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code

that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts. Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441. When the petition for removal is granted, check this box. Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing

date. Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date. Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrict litigation transfers. Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407. Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to changes in statue.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional

statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.

Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.

Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket

numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.


http://www.formsworkflow.com/

http://www.uscourts.gov/forms/civil-forms/civil-cover-sheet

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

JOHN SHAEFFER, SBN 138331

FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

1800 Century Park East, Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90067-1506

Telephone: 310-598-4150

Facsimile: 310-556-9828

E-mail: [email protected]


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION


Plaintiff,

v. WORLDVENTURES HOLDINGS, LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; WORLD VENTURES, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; WORLDVENTURES FOUNDATION, a Texas corporation; WORLDVENTURES MARKETING LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company; MICHAEL AZCUE, an individual; WAYNE NUGENT, an individual; and DANIEL STAMMEN, an individual; and DOES 1-100;

Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CASE NO.: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

At the time of service, I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action.

I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. My business

address is 1800 Century Park East, Suite 300, Los Angeles, California 90067-3005.

On June 12, 2017, I served the following document(s) described as:

1. NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF DEFENDANTS WORLDVENTURES

FOUNDATION, WORLD VENUTRES HOLDINGS, LLC AND WAYNE

NUGENT;

2. CIVIL COVER SHEET; AND

3. CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES

on the interested parties in this action as follows:

Blake J. Lindemann, Esq.

LINDEMANN LAW FIRM, APC

433 N. Camden Drive, 4th Floor

Beverly Hills, CA 90210

Tel.: 310-279-5269

Fax: 310-300-0267

E-Mail: [email protected]

Darren M. Schlecter, Esq.

Law Office of Daren M. Schlecter, APC

1925 Century Park East, Ste. 830

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Tel: 310-553-5747

Counsel for Plaintiff

Melody Yiru and Those Similarly

Situated

[ ] BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I caused said document to be personally

delivered the document(s) to the person at the addresses listed above by leaving the

documents in an envelope or package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being

served with a receptionist or an individual in charge of the office.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that

the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on June 12, 2017, at Los Angeles, California.


mailto:[email protected]