×

George Sharp Petitions to Strike Xumanii Class Action Complaints Due to Gross Violations of Law

SAN DIEGO, June 18, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- George Sharp announced today that a Motion to Strike two class action complaints brought against him on behalf of investors alleged to have lost money in Xumanii (OTCQB:XUII), was filed on June 14, 2013 and June 18, 2013, respectively.

Confusing Mr Sharp and his attornies, two yet-to-be-served identical complaints (San Diego County Division of California Superior Court Case Nos. 37-2013-00050258-CU-SL-CTL and 37-2013-00050405-CU-SL-CTL) were conspired and filed by Attorney Luan Phan of Los Angeles law firm LKP Global Law, LLP, and Xumanii, identifying Tennessee resident, Waleed Ashari, as the name plaintiff. Mr. Sharp alleges that Mr. Ashari is a puppet in a scheme concocted by Xumanii and LKP Global Law, to extend the life of the ongoing Xumanii pump and dump campaign, and counter Mr. Sharp's own complaint (San Diego County Division of California Superior Court Case No. 37-2013-00048310-CU-MC-CTL) against Xumanii for participating in a spam email promotion campaign.

Referring to the duplicate filings, Mr. Sharp commented, "It seems that LKP Global Law does not understand the basic aspects of civil procedure in the practice of law. Two identical lawsuits with the same allegations and plaintiffs were filed within days of each other. LKP Global Law later attempted to dismiss one of the complaints by filing a Request For Dismissal on the first complaint, which was subsequently rejected by the court. What LKP Global Law does not seem to understand is that in order to dismiss a class action complaint, the firm is required to seek leave of the court and not just file the paperwork appropriate when dismissing an ordinary complaint. This conduct is bound to result in a reprimand from the court."

The Motions to Strike assert California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16, commonly known as the anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute, intended to prevent lawsuits designed to chill the right to free speech, something the class action against Mr. Sharp feels was clearly designed to do. Mr. Sharp believes that the conspirators intended to temporarily lend credibility to the artificial trading volume and prices created by the Awesome Penny Stocks promotion. Mr Sharp again admonishes unsuspecting investors who tend to fall prey to such schemes that all Awesome Penny Stock promotions create hundreds of millions of dollars in losses to investors. Under the provisions of CCP Section 425.16, Mr. Ashari will become liable for Mr. Sharp's attorney's fees and costs should the motion be granted.

Mr. Sharp's special Motion to Strike also demonstrates that the lawsuit is purely the creation of Xumanii, its CEO, and its attorneys where they, and not Mr. Ashari, are the real plaintiffs; and, by law, solicitation of a class representative and members are grounds and reason alone to deny certification of the class. Class action plaintiffs may not be mere puppets controlled by their attorneys. Pursuant to Howard Gunty Profit Sharing Plan v. Sup. Ct. (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 572, 578.,"A trail court acts properly when it refuses to certify class actions in which the named plaintiff is simply lending his name to a suit controlled entirely by the class attorney." Many published cases further entrench this point of law, which seems to have been violated when Xumanii issued a press release announcing their retention of LKP Global Law, who then disseminated a draft complaint identifying Xumanii President, Alexandre Frigon, as the name Plaintiff.

Finally, under the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act ("SLUSA") the class action complaint seems to have been improperly filed in State Court. SLUSA requires that class action litigation regarding the buying or selling of stock, MUST be filed in Federal Court.

Mr. Sharp further commented, "This is not the first time that this particular law firm has filed frivolous and under-researched litigation against me on behalf of its clients, but I intend to see that this time they are made to account for their malicious actions in the course of their representation of clients with dubious characteristics and undertakings."

Updates to Mr. Sharp's litigation may be viewed by following Mr. Sharp's tweets at www.twitter.com/goniffs and his website at www.AwesomePennyScams.com.

CONTACT: George Sharp george@clippercp.comSource:George A. Sharp