Page 1


1

(9) Trade Secret

2

Misappropriation

3

(10) Conversion

4

(11) Unfair Competition

5

(12) Accounting

6

(13) Piercing the Corporate Veil

7 8

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

9 10 11 12

Plaintiffs DreamStone Entertainment Ltd. (“DreamStone”) and

13 14 15

Tigris

Entertainment,

LLC

(“Tigris”)

(collectively,

“Plaintiffs”) make the following allegations against Maysalward,

16

Inc.

(“MD”

or

“Maysalward”)

17

(collectively, “Defendants”):

18

and

Nour

Khrais

(“Khrais”)

PARTIES

19 20

1.

Plaintiff DreamStone is a United Kingdom limited company

21

having a principal place of business at 30 Faraday House, 1

22

Velocity Way, Enfield Lock, Middlesex, EN3 7FE, United Kingdom.

23

DreamStone

24

House, 1 Velocity Way, Enfield Lock, Middlesex, EN3 7FE, United

25

has

appointed

Lewis

Sarmed

Alsamari,

30

Faraday

Kingdom, as its agent for service of process. ____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

2.

Plaintiff

Tigris

is

a

Limited

Liability

Company with its principal place of business at The Colorado Center, 2500 Broadway, Building F, Suite F-125, Santa Monica,

4

California 90404.

5

as agent for service of process.

6

California

3.

Tigris has appointed Lewis Sarmed Alsamari,

On information and belief, MD is a Delaware corporation

7

with

8

Business

9

VCorp Services, LLC, 1811 Silverside, Wilmington, DE 198104345,

10 11 12 13

its

principal Park,

place

Building

of

24,

business Amman,

at

Jordan.

The MD

King has

Hussein appointed

as its agent for service of process. 4.

On information and belief, Khrais is an individual and

resident of Jordan.

He may be served at his place of business,

The King Hussein Business Park, Building 24, Amman, Jordan, or

14

wherever he may be found. 15

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

16 17 18

5. action

The

Court

pursuant

subject

to

17

§§

1338

jurisdiction,

20

jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 6.

The

court

has

matter

U.S.C.

19

21

28

has

(a)

subject

§

and

jurisdiction

100

et

(b),

and

matter

over

seq.,

copyright

federal

jurisdiction

this

question

over

this

22

action pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §§

23

2201-2202, and federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

24 25

7.

This

court

has

subject

matter

jurisdiction

over

this

action pursuant to diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3 4 5 6

amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 exclusive of interests and costs

and

proper

diversity

exists

between

Defendants

and

Plaintiff. 8.

This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the state

law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). 9.

Venue is proper in this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§

7

1391(b)-(c). Further venue is appropriate because the Agreements

8

entered into by the parties, and at issue in this litigation,

9

establishes the jurisdiction of the federal and state Courts

10

inside of California for any matter arising out of or relating

11 12 13

to the Agreements. Further, Defendants accepted California as the state of jurisdiction knowing that Plaintiff DreamStone was based in Los Angeles County, California.

14

General Allegations

15 16

10.

This case arises from Defendants’ systematic campaign of

17 18 19 20 21 22

fraud deprive

and

deception

DreamStone

designed

and

Tigris

and of

methodically their

valuable

executed

to

intellectual

property, earned money, and reputation related to the production and distribution of “GHUL: 1001 Arabian Nights.” (“Game”) 11.

Lewis Alsamari began developing the Game in April 2013.

23

Lewis—along

with

a

team

of

24

professionals—spent

25

graphics, artwork, storylines, and other intellectual property

countless

graphic hours

designers developing

and

other

voiceovers,

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

for

the

game.

(“Game

Content”)

Alsamari-owned

Tigris

Entertainment originally owned all of the intellectual property in regards to the Game Concept. Over the course of developing

4

and promoting the Game, Lewis Alsamari expended over $270,000 on

5

behalf of the Plaintiffs.

6

12.

Lewis Alsamari and his team had substantial plans for

7

“GHUL” from the start. Lewis had already begun developing the

8

“GHUL” franchise by copyrighting a movie script and engaging a

9

comic book artist before even meeting Nour Khrais or engaging

10 11 12 13

with Maysawlard for Game production. 13.

Lewis copyrighted drafts of his movie script for GHUL:

1001 Arabian Nights in December 2012, February 2013, and July 2013. Prior to meeting Nour Khrais, Tigris had already been in

14

active negotiations with multiple Hollywood companies regarding 15 16 17 18

the finance and production of the “GHUL” film franchise. 14.

While both the potential film partners and comic book

artists expressed their keen interest in working with Lewis and

19

investing significant money in Tigris’ respective projects, the

20

film partners and comic book artists wanted to evaluate revenues

21

from the Game prior to beginning respective movie and comic book

22

productions.

23

15.

Alsamari and Defendant Nour Khrais originally met through

24

a mutual acquaintance. On April 21, 2013, Nour, on behalf of

25

Maysalward,

agreed

to

sign

a

non-disclosure

agreement

with

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

original GHUL rights’ holder, Tigris, to gain access to the GHUL Game

Concept.

Nour

and

Alsamari

then

began

negotiating

an

agreement to allow Maysalward to develop the Game Concept into a

4

fully functioning video game. (“Finished Game”).

5

duty was to develop the code (“Code”) and make the Game Concept

6

into a Finished Game. Nour had no other foreseeable obligations

7

to develop any other intellectual property pertaining to the

8

Finished Game.

9 10 11 12 13

16. game

Nour’s main

Nour Khrais came away immediately impressed with the GHUL concept,

written

but

contract

expressed with

Tigris

his

reluctance

regarding

game

to

enter

into

development

a

and

confidentiality. This was the first sign of trouble. 17.

Tigris, however, refused to enter into an agreement to

14

develop

the

game

without

a

contract

establishing

its

basic

15 16 17 18

rights under the contract. would

not

proceed

with

Khrais—knowing that Lewis and Tigris a

development

deal

otherwise—finally

agreed to sign a contract establishing the roles and rights of

19

the

parties

in

regards

20

Development

21

contracts,

22

(Exhibit

23

Agreement,”

24

respectively. The Tigris Game Development Agreement specifically

Agreement”). a

A)

to

Tigris

“Non-disclosure and

publishing

and

“Commission,

(Exhibit

B)

on

and

the

Game.

Maysalward

executed

Non-Circumvention Development,

April

25th

and

(“Tigris two

Agreement”

and

Assignment

May

3rd,

2013,

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

required Maysalward to “design and develop [the Finished Game] and to Assign all intellectual property therein to [Tigris].” 18.

Following the Tigris Agreements’ execution, 1821 Media

4

expressed their keen interest in partnering up with Tigris for

5

the GHUL movie.

6

DreamStone Entertainment to own all intellectual property rights

7

pertaining to the Game; Tigris would continue to own all other

8

intellectual property related to GHUL not directly affiliated

9

with the Game.

10 11 12 13

19.

Lewis decided to set up a new entity named

Khrais agreed to the new entity formation plan, believing

that forming the new entity would both make the GHUL movie more attractive to 1821 Media.

Khrais also knew—from this point

onwards—that the Game needed to attract significant downloads

14

and revenue to ensure 1821 Media’s finance and production of the 15 16 17 18 19 20

GHUL

movie.

information,

Khrais through

would

later

implicit

consistently

threats

of

taking

leverage the

this

down

or

improperly marketing game, to advance his negotiating position with Lewis following the Game’s launch. 20.

Khrais—despite providing immediate attention to all other

21

matters

between

the

parties—continually

dodged

DreamStone’s

22

requests to execute either a non-disclosure agreement or game

23

development agreement.

24

obtain Maysalward’s execution, the parties finally entered into

25

a “Commission, Development and Assignment Agreement” for Game

After several unsuccessful efforts to

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

production on August 15, 2013.

While Khrais executed the game

development agreement on August 15, 2013, he failed to deliver the document to DreamStone until September 5, 2013.

Khrais—

4

through constant acts of deception—has never executed the non-

5

disclosure agreement provided by DreamStone.

6

Commission, Development and Assignment Agreement

7 8 9

21.

At

all

relevant

times,

Defendant

Khrais

acted

primary negotiator and figurehead for Maysalward.

as

the

Khrais is an

10

experienced developer in the gaming industry and has entered

11

numerous contracts with similarly situated, inexperienced game

12

developers in the same shoes as DreamStone.

13 14 15

22.

Maysalward and DreamStone, entered into a “Commission,

Development, and Assignment Agreement” (“Assignment Agreement,”) with

an

Appendix

pertaining

specifically

to

GHUL

(“Game

16

Agreement”) (collectively, “Agreements,” attached as Exhibit C) 17 18 19 20

on August 15, 2013.

Under the Agreements, Maysalward agreed to

“design, develop and co-publish [the Game] and to assign all intellectual property rights therein to owner” in exchange for

21

fifty

percent

of

net

profits

generated

from

publishing

the

22

Finished Game.

23

profits received by

24

Account, less any commissions or fees deducted by App Store.”

25

The Agreements notably did not provide for any deduction in net

The Agreements defined Net Profits as “gross any

App

Store

and

paid

into

Developer’s

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

profits

for

building

MD’s

the

expenses

Game.

confidentiality

related The

clause,

to

building

Agreements

stipulating

that

marketing

also all

for

included

a

communications

4

regarding game design, game ideas and strategy were to be kept

5

confidential.

6

23.

The Agreements also required Maysalward to:

7

(a)

Account for all net profits

8

(b)

Provide

9 10

with

access

to

revenue

reports,

including password access on developer sites; and (c)

11

Distribute fifty percent of net profits to DreamStone

(“Plaintiff’s

12 13

DreamStone

Net

Profits”)

within

seven

days

of

receiving the same. 24.

The Agreements additionally granted DreamStone the right

14

to reinstate the Finished Game in the event Maysalward breached 15 16 17 18 19 20

the Agreements by within

seven

days

failing of

pay

DreamStone net profits

or

(2)

collection;

provide

DreamStone

revenue reports. 25.

Pursuant

to

the

Agreements,

Plaintiff

and

Defendants

jointly launched the game on Monday October 14, 2013. Defendant’s Never Abides by the Agreements’ Explicit

21

Provisions

22 23

to (1)

26.

Defendants ignored their obligations under the Agreements

24

immediately

25

whatsoever—have

following

project

launch.

Defendants—at

no

time

(1) paid any of Plaintiff’s Net Profits; (2)

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

provided comprehensive reports indicating revenue attributable to the Game; or (3) assigned any intellectual property rights in the Game to DreamStone. Defendants currently hold the Finished

4

Game hostage, disallowing DreamStone from reinstating the game

5

and mitigating their loss in revenue.

6

27.

Alsamari, Tigris and DreamStone entered their respective

7

Agreements

with

the

8

partnership

with

Maysalward

9

emailed Alsamari to fortify the notion that he and Maysalward

10 11 12

were

entering

the

intention and

Agreements

as

to

create

Khrais.

amicable

a

long-lasting

Khrais

repeatedly

partners

of

the

respective parties, as displayed in the following Nour Khrais email excepts:

13 14

April 24th, 2013: "[We] are believer[s] in [a] long

15

term partnership. Lets do it and harvest success

16

together."

17 18

May 2nd, 2013: “Regarding the Support question in

19

contract. It can continue after the 8 week. By end of

20

the day [we] is having this project as [a] Win-Win

21

partnership."

22 23

August 17th, 2013: "Inshallah [God Willing] we will

24

make it together a Success."

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1

August 19th, 2013: "I am taking it with me for sure

2

(Games-com is this week) and will make unofficial

3

business about it.. I think the game need to be teased

4

well with Facebook and interviews we talked about, did

5

you have the chance to print something out so you

6

can start making interviews about it‌etc .."

7 8

August 22nd, 2013: "I had a meeting today with my

9

friend who is leading the Game Division in the second

10

biggest TV in Germany ProSiben and we agreed to work

11

together on Maysalward game including Ghul. Will need

12

to do a German localization with Voice over and text

13

but he needs to test with his team this week.."

14 15

August 22nd 2013:"They loved the game and the story ..

16

I think we are getting it right bro.."

17 18

August 23rd 2013:"Hello!

Do u think that you can have

19

a voice over in Arabic!? We can push Apple Middle East

20

to feature it but we need Arabic interfaces for it."

21 22 23 24

28.

With such assurances, Khrais coaxed DreamStone into (1)

commissioning

additional

voiceover

work

to

launch

an

Arabic

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

version of the Game; and (2) providing Khrais with more concepts for game development. 29.

These

assurances

also

forestalled

DreamStone’s

initial

4

concerns about non-payment of Plaintiff’s net profits and access

5

to revenue reports after successful Game launch. After months of

6

non-payment, however, DreamStone could no longer sit patiently

7

while

8

contractual obligations.

9 10 11 12 13

30.

its

“partners”

failed

to

live

up

to

their

basic

After never gaining access to revenue reports and not

seeing a dime of net profits attributable to the Finished Game sales, DreamStone emailed Khrais to demand revenue reports and his share of profits. In response Khrais shamelessly responded: “Yes sure we are a team and partners . . . Happy to build on it

14

for the future….” 15 16 17 18

31.

Between

October

continually

fabricated

Plaintiff’s

Net

2013 reasons

Profits,

and for

provide

February failing

access

to

to

2014, pay

Khrais

DreamStone

revenue

reports,

19

provide assignment of intellectual property rights, and provide

20

DreamStone with a copy of the Finished Game.

21

32.

While fabricating reasons for failing to abide by its

22

basic contractual obligations, Defendants proactively disabled

23

DreamStone’s access to any reports, including reports regarding

24

general performance of the game, to keep DreamStone in the dark

25

about the Game’s economic and logistical performance.

____________________________________________________________________________________________


DreamStone Confronts Defendant

1 2 3 4 5

33.

After months of failing to comply with their contractual

obligations,

DreamStone

confronted

Khrais

about

Maysalward’s

failure to pay net profits or provide revenue reports. 34.

In a January 12th, 2014 email, DreamStone demanded that

6

Maysalward follow the Agreements by granting it access to all

7

revenue reports and an accounting of all revenues attributable

8

to the Game.

9

and

10 11 12 13

forced

Maysalward failed to provide a suitable response Dreamstone

to

retain

current

counsel,

Nathaniel

Kelly. 35.

On January 24, 2014, Nathaniel Kelly sent a demand letter

to Khrais and Maysalward to either: (1) abide by its contractual obligations; or (2) provide the Finished Game to DreamStone to

14

allow for reinstatement and further economic exploitation, as 15 16 17 18

provided under the Agreements. 36.

Instead

of

providing

the

requested

information

or

reinstatement pursuant to the Agreements, Defendants immediately

19

and unilaterally pulled the game off the market and promised to

20

provide requested revenue reporting.

21

would remove all intellectual property owned by DreamStone in a

22

veiled threat to re-launch a competing video game under his

23

corporate umbrella.

24

pitching the game’s technology to third party competitors during

25

this time period.

Khrais indicated that he

Plaintiffs have learned that Khrais began

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

37.

Khrais,

instead

of

immediately

sending

the

promised

reports, emailed shoddy reports with little to no useful one week later. His email proved that he had lied once again—the

4

reports

glaringly

5

revenue.

6

38.

omitted

any

information

regarding

Game

At the time of this filing, Khrais and Maysalward have

7

failed to provide DreamStone with any revenue payments, revenue

8

reports, or assignment of intellectual property. They currently

9

hold DreamStone’s Game hostage in their headquarters in Jordan,

10

disallowing Plaintiff from reinstating the game and mitigating

11 12 13

damages. Khrais—despite knowing that Plaintiffs depended on Game performance

to

produce

the

GHUL

movie

and

comic

books—has

refused to provide DreamStone with a copy of the Game.

14

39.

As

a

result

of

Maysalward’s

refusal

to

abide

by

its

15 16 17 18

contractual obligations or even respectfully act as decent human beings,

Plaintiffs

have

suffered

significant

and

irreparable

damages: DreamStone has no Finished Game to promote or generate

19

revenues. Plaintiffs’ tentative deals with movie and comic books

20

have

21

partnership with dreams of big economic success—now owe more

22

than $250,000 for the costs expended in developing the Game

23

Concept

24

meanwhile

25

campaign and Plaintiffs’ hard work and ingenuity.

fallen

and

apart.

Plaintiffs—who

Khrais-requested

continue

to

reap

entered

voice the

over

fruits

the

Agreements

work. of

their

and

Defendants deceptive

____________________________________________________________________________________________


CLAIMS

1

Count 1: Breach of Contract

2

40.

3 4

Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–40 as if fully set

forth herein. 41.

5

The

parties

entered

into

the

Agreements

to

form

a

6

business relationship under which the parties would be granted a

7

share of profits in the partnership business, which was to co-

8

publish, market and sell the Game.

9

equal

10

13

of

50%

net

profits

to

Maysalward

and

DreamStone.

11 12

allocation

The parties agreed to an

42.

The

Agreements

required

Maysalward

to

(1)

deliver

Plaintiff’s Net Profits within seven days of receipt; (2) assign all intellectual property from the Finished Game’s development

14

to

Plaintiff;

(3)

provide

Plaintiff

with

Finished

Game;

(4)

15 16 17 18

provide

Plaintiff

with

password

access

to

online

revenue

reports; (5) provide Plaintiff with revenue reports in the event access to online revenue reports were temporarily interrupted,

19

but warranted to continue providing access thereafter to any and

20

all revenue reports ; and (6) provide Plaintiff with the right

21

to

22

breached the Contract.

reinstate

the

Game

on

applicable

23

43.

24

promises

25

conditions of the Agreements.

platforms

if

Defendant

Plaintiffs have performed all conditions, covenants, and required

to

it

in

accordance

of

the

terms

and

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2

44.

All conditions required for Defendant’s performance have

occurred. 45.

Defendants’ have breached the Agreements by:

4

a.

Failing to pay Plaintiff’s Net Profits;

5

b.

Failing to provide Plaintiff intellectual property, or

3

6

assignment

7

Game’s development;

8 9

of

the

same,

arising

from

the

Finished

c.

Failing to provide Plaintiff with the Finished Game;

d.

Failing to provide Plaintiff with access to revenue

10

reporting databases;

11

e.

Failing to provide Plaintiff with any original reports

12

or authentic online screenshots regarding revenue;

13 14

f.

Holding the Finished Game hostage in its headquarters

15

in Amman-Jordan to prevent Plaintiff from reinstating

16

the Game pursuant to the Agreements.

17

46.

As

a

result

of

Defendants’

breach

of

the

Agreements,

18

Plaintiffs has suffered damages, including, but not limited to:

19

(1) out-of-pocket costs for Game concept development; (2) the

20

lost revenue for the game being off the market after Defendant

21

unilaterally took Game off the market; (3) loss of non-assigned

22 23 24 25

intellectual property; (4) Plaintiff’s Net Profits; (5) the loss of revenue caused by not having the game in its possession to reinstate it on all applicable platforms; (6) lost production of the GHUL movie and revenues therefrom; and (7) lost production ____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2

of the GHUL comic book and revenues therefrom.

Plaintiffs are

entitled to damages in amount to be proven at trial. 47.

3

On information and belief, Khrais acted as the alter ego

4

of Maysalward at all relevant times related to this cause of

5

action. At all relevant times, such a unity of interest existed

6

between Khrais and Maysalward that Maysalward ceased to have a

7

separate corporate personality. At no time did Alsamari, Tigris

8

or

9

individual affiliated with Maysalward other than Khrais. At all

10 11 12 13

DreamStone

relevant Maysalward

deal

times,

with

any

Khrais

as

its

other

acted

owner,

as

CEO,

officer,

the and

staff

sole sole

member

or

figurehead

of

negotiator.

On

information and belief, Maysalward failed to observe corporate formalities and failed to keep minutes or accurate records. On

14

information and belief, Khrais has caused assets to be used for 15 16 17 18 19 20

his own personal and business gain, including, but not limited to, Plaintiff’s share of net profits owed under the Agreements. In essence, Maysalward was a mere shell and conduit for the fraudulent business practices of its owner, Nour Khrais. 48.

Adherence

to

the

fiction

of

Maysalward’s

separate

21

existence would permit an abuse of the corporate privilege and

22

would

23

deemed the alter ego of Maysalward and held personally liable on

24

any and all debts owed to Plaintiff.

25

sanction

fraud

and

abuse.

Therefore,

Khrais

should

be

Count 2: Fraud

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1

49.

forth herein.

2 3

Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–48 as if fully set

50.

Defendants

made

repeated

false

promises

and

4

representations concerning the relationship between the parties,

5

including:

6

a. Defendants’

7

profits;

8 9 10 11 12 13

intent

to

pay

DreamStone

50%

of

net

b. Defendants’ intent to provide DreamStone with access to live online revenue reports; c. Defendants’ intent to provide DreamStone with revenue reports; d. Defendants’ assign

all

intent

to

provide

intellectual

Plaintiff

property

arising

with

and

from

the

14

Finished Game’s development to DreamStone; 15 16 17 18

e. Defendants’

intent

to

deliver

f. Defendants'

intent and

20

development

21

Plaintiffs on game projects;

for

ideas

to

discussions

23

finished

Game

to

Defendant;

19

22

a

the

keep

confidential

regarding purpose

of

future

video

partnering

all game with

g. Defendants’ intent to act as Plaintiffs’ “partners” in Game distribution; and

24 25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


h. Defendant’s intention to allow Plaintiff to re-launch

1

the

2

in

the

event

of

Defendant’s

breach

of

contract.

3 4

game

51.

On multiple occasions since the Game launch in October

5

2013,

6

DreamStone with revenue reports; and (2) provide DreamStone with

7

revenue

8

pursuant to the Agreements.

9 10 11 12 13

52.

Khrais

misrepresented

within

7

days

of

that

Defendants

Maysalward’s

would

receipt

(1)

of

supply

revenues

Khrais has wrongfully and deceitfully: a. Induced

Plaintiffs

to

provide

Defendants

with

its

intellectual property, specifically the Game Concept and other trade secrets; b. Intentionally misrepresented his intentions to provide

14

and assign all intellectual property rights arising 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

from Game development to DreamStone with intellectual property right assignments; c. Intentionally

misrepresented

that

he

would

provide

DreamStone with revenue reports or access to the same; d. Intentionally

misrepresented

that

he

would

provide

Plaintiffs with access to the Finished Game; e. Intentionally

misrepresented

that

payments

of

net

profits would be forthcoming; f. Intentionally misrepresented that he would abide by the Agreements’ confidentiality provisions;

____________________________________________________________________________________________


g. Intentionally misrepresented that he would "partner"

1

with

2

Plaintiffs

development

3

to

on gain

additional

and

access

Plaintiffs’

5

h. Intentionally

diverted

6

information

belief,

7

business and personal use;

9 10 11 12 13

game trade

secrets and other intellectual property (“IP”); and

4

8

to

future

53.

Defendants

and

made

misrepresentations

with

to

these the

intent

funds,

on

other

bank

false to

Plaintiff’s accounts

promises

deceive

and

for

and induce

Plaintiff to (1) provide Defendants with the Game Concept, trade secrets, and other IP for their personal benefit; and (2) allow them exclusive access to revenue in order to wrongfully abscond with Plaintiff’s Net Profits.

14

54.

Plaintiffs

relied

on

the

misrepresentations,

false

15 16 17 18 19

promises and material omissions by providing Defendants with the Game Concept, a 50% share of net profits, and various other confidential information and trade secrets. 55.

Defendants knew the falsity of the misrepresentations and

20

promises at the time of the statements and had no reasonable

21

ground to believe them as true. Defendants made the statements

22

with the sole intent to deceive Plaintiffs and cause Plaintiffs

23

to take the aforementioned actions.

24 25

56. and

Plaintiffs were unaware of the falsity of the promises

representations

and

took

the

actions

stated

above

in

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3 4 5

reliance on Defendants’ statements.

Plaintiffs, in justifiable

reliance on Defendants’ false misrepresentations and promises, provided Defendants with years’ worth of ingenuity and the costs of developing the Game Concept. 57.

Plaintiffs, in justifiable reliance on Defendants’ false

6

misrepresentations,

7

have sole access to revenues attributable to Game publication.

8

58.

also

allowed

and

entrusted

Defendants

to

As a direct result of Defendants’ fraud, Defendants have

9

possession of the Game and have the ability to copy, sell or

10

exploit the Game Concept and the Game, and infringe upon its

11 12 13

copyrighted Plaintiff

features.

has

lost

Further, considerable

as

a

result

time,

effort

of

the

and

fraud,

money

it

invested in the Game Concept and the relationship between the

14

parties over the last year, as well as any revenue of the sales 15 16 17 18

from the Game. 59.

Defendants’

actions

as

alleged

herein

are

fraudulent,

malicious and oppressive and constitute despicable conduct in

19

conscious

disregard

for

Plaintiffs’

rights.

Plaintiffs

20

therefore entitled to exemplary and punitive damages pursuant to

21

California Civil Code Section 3294.

22

Count 3: Breach of Fiduciary Duty (Duty of Good Faith and

23

Loyalty)

24 25

60.

are

Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–59 as if fully set

forth herein.

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

61.

Defendants owed a fiduciary relationship to Plaintiffs

derived from the joint venture established by the Agreements: Plaintiffs

reposed

a

confidence

in

the

integrity

of

both

4

defendants, requiring Defendants to act with utmost good faith.

5

These confidences, included but are not limited to: (1) access

6

to Plaintiffs’ valuable Game Concept, trade secrets, and other

7

IP; (2) development and assignment of Code developed for the

8

Game;

9

revenue attributable to the Game..

10 11 12 13

and

(3)

authority

to

account

and

exclusive

access

to

Defendants owed Plaintiffs a

duty of loyalty and the duty to refrain from self-dealing, as set forth under California Corporations Code Section 16404. 62.

On information and belief, Defendants acted in bad faith

in a calculated attempt to circumvent and defeat the terms of

14

the Agreements and deprive Plaintiffs of the benefits derived 15 16 17 18

from the same. 63. alleged

On

information

actions

for

belief,

their

own

benefit

Plaintiffs’,

20

considered on an equal basis as their own. 64.

Defendants

Defendants

19

21

which

and

should

and

have

took

the

above

disregard protected

to and

As a proximate result of Defendants’ breach, Defendants

22

have deprived and will continue to deprive Plaintiffs of the

23

benefits entitled to it under the Agreements. This breach has

24

caused Plaintiffs to suffer damages in an amount determinable at

25

trial.

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2

65.

Defendants

breached

their

duty

of

good

faith

through

certain actions, including, but not limited to: a. Refusing to provide Plaintiffs with any net profits;

3 4

b. Diverting funds for other uses;

5

c. Inducing Plaintiffs to provide the Game Concept, trade

6

secrets, and other IP with intent to misappropriate

7

the same for their own exclusive benefit;

8

d. Failing to disclose any financial information related

9

to the relationship;

10

e. Not acting in the best interests of Plaintiffs;

11

f. Forcing Plaintiffs to request the game be taken off

12

the

13

market

if

Defendants

failed

to

comply

with

obligations;

14

g. Unilaterally taking the Game off the market; 15

h. Making veiled threats to cease distributing the game

16

to hinder Plaintiffs’ tentative movie and comic book

17

deals; and

18 19

i. Failing to provide Plaintiffs with a working Game for

20

reinstatement of the Game following Defendants’ breach

21

of the Agreements.

22 23

66.

Defendants breached their duty of loyalty to Plaintiffs

through certain actions, including, but not limited to:

24

a. Refusing to provide Plaintiffs with any net profits;

25

b. Diverting funds for their own uses;

____________________________________________________________________________________________


c. Inducing Plaintiffs to provide the Game Concept, trade

1

secrets, and other IP with an intent to misappropriate

2

for their own beneficial use;

3

d. Failing to disclose any financial information related

4

to Game;

5 6

e. Not acting in the best interests of Plaintiffs;

7

f. Forcing Plaintiffs to request the game be taken off

8

the

9

obligations;

10

market

if

Defendants

failed

to

comply

with

g. Unilaterally taking the Game off the market;

11

h. Making veiled threats to cease distributing the game

12

to hinder Plaintiffs’ tentative movie and comic book

13

deals; and

14

i. Failing to provide Plaintiffs with a working Game for 15

reinstatement of the Game following Defendants’ breach

16

of the Agreements.

17 18

67.

As a direct result of Defendants’ breach, Defendants have

19

deprived Plaintiffs and continues to deprive Plaintiffs of the

20

benefits of the applicable Agreements. As result, Plaintiffs are

21

entitled to all damages award for all harm that Defendants have

22

caused—even

23

trial.

24 25

68.

unanticipated

harm—in

amount

to

be

determined

at

Plaintiffs have and continue to be irreparably harmed by

Defendants’

breach

of

their

fiduciary

duties

and

Plaintiffs’

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

remedy at law is not adequate to compensate for the injuries inflicted by Defendants. 69.

It is impossible and impractical for Plaintiffs to enjoy

4

the

rights

rendered

5

continually

6

continue

7

unless equitable relief is granted and a constructive trust is

8

formed

9

Finished Game, all IP at issue, and revenue owed to Plaintiff.

10

Count 4: Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic

breach

to

to

suffer

order

under their

13

Agreements

fiduciary

irreparable

Defendants’

11 12

the

harm

to

while

duties. from

compel

Defendants

Plaintiffs

Defendants’

the

delivery

will breach

of

the

Relations 70.

Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–69 as if fully set

forth herein.

14

71.

Defendants

intentionally

interfered

with

Plaintiffs’

15 16 17 18 19

economic relationship with 1821 Media to finance and produce the GHUL

movie

that

would

have

likely

resulted

in

an

economic

benefit to Plaintiffs. 72.

Defendants knew about the relationship between 1821 Media

20

and Plaintiffs, and knew that Plaintiffs depended on the game’s

21

successful performance and continued publication to allow for

22

1821 Media’s agreement to finance and produce the GHUL movie.

23

73.

Despite

knowing

about

breached

the

24

intentionally

25

misrepresentations,

the

relationship,

Agreements,

unilaterally

and

Defendants

continually wrongfully

made ceased

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3 4 5 6

publication

of

Plaintiffs

the

with

Finished

the

Game,

and

refused

Game

as

required

Finished

to

provide

under

the

Agreements. 74.

As

a

result

of

Defendant’s

actions,

Plaintiffs

have

suffered damages in an amount determinable at trial. 75.

Defendants’ conduct in committing the above actions is

7

malicious and oppressive and constituted despicable disregard of

8

Plaintiffs’ rights and was intended to cause Plaintiffs’ harm.

9

Plaintiffs

10 11

are

therefore

to

punitive

and

exemplary

damages. Count 5: Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic

12 13

entitled

Relations 76.

Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–75 as if fully set

14

forth herein. 15 16 17 18 19 20

77.

Defendants

negligently

interfered

with

Plaintiffs’

economic relationship with 1821 Media to finance and produce the GHUL

movie

that

likely

would

have

resulted

in

an

economic

benefit to Plaintiffs. 78.

Defendants

knew

should and

known

22

should

known

23

successful performance and continued publication to allow for

24

1821 Media’s agreement to finance and produce the GHUL movie.

depended

on

and the

knew

the

between

Plaintiffs

Plaintiffs,

about

relationship

that

Media

have

21

have

1821

or

or

game’s

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3 4 5

79.

Despite knowing about the relationship, Defendants failed

to act with reasonable care in regards to the Game by ceasing its publication and disallowing DreamStone from reinstating the Finished Game on applicable platforms. 80.

Defendants engaged in wrongful conduct by intentionally

6

breaching the Agreements, continually making misrepresentations,

7

unilaterally and wrongfully ceasing publication of the Finished

8

Game, and refusing to provide Plaintiffs with the Finished Game

9

as required under the Agreements.

10 11 12 13

81.

As

a

result

of

the

aforementioned

actions,

the

relationship between 1821 Media was disrupted, causing harm to Plaintiffs. 82.

Defendants’ wrongful conduct was a substantial factor in

14

causing Plaintiffs’ harm. 15 16 17

83.

As

a

20 21

of

Defendants’

actions,

Plaintiffs

have

suffered damages in an amount determinable at trial. Count 6: Money Had and Received

18 19

result

84.

Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–83 as if fully set

forth herein. 85.

Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs for money had and

22

received because Defendants (1) received Plaintiff’s Net Profits

23

due to DreamStone; (2) have disallowed DreamStone from obtaining

24

Plaintiff’s Net Profits for its beneficial use as required under

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3 4

the Agreements; and (3) have failed to provide DreamStone with any money as of the time of this filing. 86.

Defendants

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

caused

Plaintiffs

damages

pursuant

to

this cause of action in an amount determinable at trial. Count 7: Trademark Infringement

5 6

have

87.

Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–86 as if fully set

forth herein. 88. “GHUL,”

Plaintiffs and

are

entitled

“DreamStone”

Specifically,

and

Plaintiffs

to

trademark

pursuant acquired

to

15

protection U.S.C.

applicable

for

1227(a). trademark

protection because Plaintiffs were the first entities to use “GHUL”

and

“DreamStone”

(collectively,

“Trademarks”)

in

commerce.

14

89.

Defendants were provided with the Trademarks on or about

15 16 17 18

August 15, 2013 based on the agreement that Defendant would (1) develop code for the Finished Game; (2) market the product; (3) assign

all

intellectual

property

arising

from

the

Finished

19

Game’s development to Plaintiffs; (4) provide Plaintiffs with

20

access

21

Plaintiff’s Net Profits.

22

90.

to

revenue

Because

reports;

Defendants

and

(5)

immediately

provide

breached

Plaintiffs

the

with

Agreements

23

and had no intention to abide by its terms, Defendants never had

24

a license to use Plaintiffs’ Trademarks, and have infringed on

25

Plaintiffs’

Trademarks

without

permission,

by

copying,

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

producing, distributing, placing and selling the Finished Game that include Plaintiffs’ trademarks. 91.

Defendants’ distribution, marketing, promotion, offering

4

for sale, and sale of the Finished Game bearing the Trademarks

5

was likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception as to the

6

source,

7

Finished Game and the distribution of the same. As a result of

8

Defendants’ unauthorized use of trademarks that are identical to

9

Plaintiff’s trademarks, the public is likely to believe that

10

Defendants’ distribution and removal of the Game was affiliated

11 12 13

affiliation,

sponsorship,

or

authenticity

of

the

or approved by Plaintiffs. 92.

Defendants’ unauthorized use of the Trademarks falsely

represented

that

the

Game

and

quality

of

distribution

was

14

approved and affiliated with Plaintiffs. Defendants’ use of the 15 16 17 18 19 20

Trademarks beyond Plaintiffs control disallowed Plaintiffs from controlling

the

quality

of

distribution

and

overall

messages

associated with the Trademarks and the Finished Game bearing those Trade Marks. 93.

Specifically,

Finished

Game

Defendants’ and

unauthorized

the

22

distribution of the game caused immense damages to Plaintiffs’

23

reputation,

24

Plaintiff’s

business

goodwill

reputation),

action

to

(including

lost

profits,

disrupt

of

21

Plaintiffs’

subsequent

distribution

injury the

cost

the

to of

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

future corrective advertisement to correct public confusion, and the tentative movie and comic book deals described above. 94.

Defendants’

infringement

of

Trademarks

was

willful,

4

intended to reap the benefit of the goodwill of Plaintiff, and

5

violates Section 32(1) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1).

6

95.

The removal of the Game from commerce has also caused

7

great harm to Plaintiffs in the gaming community: Downloaders of

8

the

9

explanation regarding why it removed the game from relevant APP

10 11 12 13

Game

stores,

have

resulting

continually

in

a

contacted

diminishment

of

DreamStone

DreamStone’s

seeking

public

perception as a quality content manager and game distributor. 96.

As a result of Defendant’s wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs

have suffered, and will continue to suffer, substantial damages.

14

Under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) Plaintiffs are entitled to recover 15 16 17 18 19

damages, including any and all profits Defendants have made as a result of their wrongful conduct. 97.

full costs pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a). Count 8: Copyright Infringement (17 U.S.C. § et seq.)

20 21 22 23

Plaintiffs are further entitled to attorneys’ fees and

98.

Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–97 as if fully set

forth herein. 99.

Plaintiffs are entitled to copyright protection for both

24

the Finished Game—including component codes and Game Concept—

25

pursuant to the Agreements.

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

100. Plaintiffs are entitled to copyright protection for the Game Concept under Section 17 U.S.C. § 104. 101. Plaintiffs are entitled to copyright protection for the

4

Code and Finished Game developed by Maysalward pursuant to 17

5

U.S.C. §§ 104, 204. Specifically, Plaintiffs are entitled to all

6

copyrights

7

assigned DreamStone with the Finished Game and Code pursuant to

8

the Agreements.

in

the

Finished

Game

and

Code

because

Defendants

9

102. Defendants were provided with the Game Concept based on

10

the Agreements stipulating that Defendant would (1) develop Code

11 12 13

for the Game; (2) market the Game; (3) assign all intellectual property,

including

the

code,

arising

from

the

Game’s

development to Plaintiffs; (4) provide Plaintiffs with access to

14

revenue reports; and (5) provide Plaintiffs with 50% of net 15 16 17 18

profits from sale of the game. 103. Because

Defendants

immediately

breached

the

Agreements

and had no intention to abide by its terms, Defendants have

19

infringed

20

without permission, by copying, producing, distributing, placing

21

and selling the Game that includes the copyrighted Codes and

22

Game Concept.

23 24

on

Plaintiffs’

Code

and

Game

Concept

copyrights

104. On information and belief, Defendants have infringed on Plaintiffs’ copyrights knowingly, deliberately and willfully.

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

105. As

a

direct

and

proximate

result

of

Defendants’

infringement, Plaintiffs are entitled to damages and Defendants’ profits pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(b) for each infringement.

4

Plaintiffs are entitled to damages in an amount determinable at

5

trial.

6 7 8

106. Plaintiffs are further entitled to attorneys’ fees and full costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C § 505. 107. Plaintiffs

are

also

entitled

to

an

order

compelling

9

Defendants to provide a written account of, and delivery to

10

Plaintiffs of all original and copies of the copyrighted Code,

11 12 13

Game Concept, and Finished Game. 108. Unless enjoined by the Court, Defendants’ conduct and continued use Defendants’ conduct, as herein alleged, is causing

14

and

will

continue

to

cause

Plaintiffs

great

and

irreparable

15 16 17 18

injury that cannot be fully compensated with monetary damages unless enjoined and restrained by this Court. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 502. Plaintiffs are entitled to preliminary injunction

19

to prohibit further infringements of Plaintiffs’ Game Concept

20

and Code copyrights. Count 9: Trade Secret Misappropriation

21 22 23

109. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1-109 as if fully set forth herein.

24 25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3 4 5 6

110. Over a period in excess of 10 months and at significant expense, Plaintiffs developed the Game Concept, constituting a valuable trade secret. 111. Defendants

acquired

the

Game

112. Defendants

13

applicable

committed

assigned to it through the Agreements.

12

Code

also

8

11

the

have

provide

10

through

improper

misrepresentation, artifice and deceit as described above.

7

9

Concept

to

the

theft

Game

by

that

failing was

to

properly

113. Defendants’ improper acquisition of the Plaintiffs’ Game Concept

and

Code

unjustly

enriched

Defendants

to

receive

benefits they otherwise would not have received, including, but not limited to, the Code and all net profits. Additionally, Defendants received additional information by using Plaintiffs’

14

valuable trade secrets—which constitute trade secrets in and of 15 16 17 18

themselves—including, information

but

(explicitly

not

limited

designated

as

to,

the

confidential

following by

the

Agreements) related to the Game:

19

a.

Technical data and know how related to the Game;

20

b.

Statistics related to the Game launch;

21

c.

Service users of the Game;

22

d.

User join rates of the Game;

23

e.

Click rates of the Game; and

24

f.

Conversion rates of the game.

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3 4 5

114. Defendants have failed to provide the above information related to the Game, despite their contractual obligation to do so and improper misappropriation. 115. On information and belief, Defendants plan on using this information to launch their own game to compete with Plaintiffs.

6

116. As a direct and proximate result of the misappropriation,

7

Plaintiffs have suffered actual damages and Defendants have been

8

unjustly enriched.

9 10 11 12 13

117. On information and belief, Plaintiffs allege that each of misappropriation

willfully

and

maliciously,

and

therefore

Plaintiffs are entitled to double damages pursuant to California Civil Code Section 3426.3. 118. Unless enjoined by this court, Defendants’ conduct and

14

continued

use

of

misappropriated

great

and

trade

secrets

will

cause

15 16 17 18

further request

that,

irreparable

after

trial,

injury. the

Plaintiffs

Court

issue

a

therefore permanent

injunction, restraining Defendants and their agents, employees,

19

attorneys, representatives and anyone acting at their direction

20

or behalf from misappropriating, using, or disclosing, without

21

the

22

proprietary

23

limited to those involved in the development, production, and

24

distribution of the Game.

25

express

or

implied

information

consent and

trade

of

Plaintiffs,

secrets,

Plaintiffs’

including

but

not

Count 10: Conversion

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

119. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–118 as if fully set forth herein. 120. Plaintiffs own property rights in the share of the net

4

profits

paid

5

Agreements.

to

Defendants

and

the

Finished

Game

under

the

6

121. Defendants wrongfully converted Plaintiffs’ share of the

7

money paid to Defendants. Defendants, on information and belief,

8

have wrongfully converted Plaintiffs’ share of money for their

9

businesses and personal use.

10 11 12 13

122.

Defendants

have

also

intentionally

and

substantially

interfered with Plaintiff’s property by taking possession of and refusing to provide Plaintiff with a copy of the Finished Game in order allow for its reinstatement on applicable platforms and

14

sale. 15 16 17 18 19

123. As

a

Plaintiffs’

proximate share

of

result

the

net

of

Defendants’

profits,

conversion

Plaintiffs

have

of been

damaged and is entitled to an amount determinable at trial. 124. As

a

proximate

result

of

Defendants’

conversion

of

20

Plaintiffs’ Finished Game, Plaintiffs have sustained actual and

21

special

22

Plaintiffs were unable to market and collect money as a result

23

of Defendants’ conversion of the game; (2) Defendants knew that

24

Plaintiffs would sustain lost profits, lose market visibility,

25

allow

damages.

for

Special

competitors

to

damages

compete

are

with

required

the

because

Game,

and

(1)

other

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

injuries as a result of the conversion; and (3) Plaintiffs could not have prevented the loss through the use of reasonable care. 125. Defendants’

converting

disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights and was intended to cause harm

6

to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to punitive and

7

exemplary damages.

9 10 11 12 13 14

will

continue

Court

to

grants

convert

and

constituted

property

5

the

oppressive

Plaintiffs’

was

126. Unless

and

in

4

8

malicious

conduct

injunctive

Plaintiffs’

relief,

property

despicable

Defendants and

cause

Plaintiffs great harm and irreparable injury, monetary damages alone will not afford adequate relief. Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek preliminary and permanent injunctive relief. Count 11: Unfair Competition (California Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq.)

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

127. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–126 as if fully set forth herein. 128. The

acts

and

omissions

of

Defendants

alleged

in

this

Complaint constitute unfair business practices in violation of California Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq. 129. Defendants’ unlawful business practices include, without

22 23 24 25

limitation, Defendants’ conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, trade

secret

misappropriation,

and

other

wrongs

described

herein.

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

130.

Defendants

also

unfairly

interfered

with

Plaintiffs’

ability to compete by misappropriating Plaintiffs’ trade secrets and confidential information, converting and failing to turnover

4

the Game, and diluting the value of Plaintiffs’ Game and GHUL

5

franchise.

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

131. This conduct was unfair because it offends established public policy and was immoral, unethical and unscrupulous. 132. Defendants have acted deliberately with the intent to unfairly

benefit

from

the

expense,

time,

effort

and

labor

expended by Defendants in developing the Finished Game and its confidential

intellectual

property

related

thereto,

and

with

callous disregard to Plaintiffs’ rights. 133. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Defendants have been

14

and will be unjustly enriched in an amount to be proven at 15 16 17 18

trial, for which Plaintiffs seek restitution. 134. The unlawful and unfair business practices undertaken by Defendants have caused irreparable harm to Plaintiffs for which

19

Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law, and those unlawful

20

business practices will continue to cause such irreparable harm

21

unless restrained by this Court. Count 12: Accounting

22 23 24

135. Plaintiffs incorporates paragraphs 1–134 as if fully set forth herein.

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

136. Plaintiffs and Defendants were involved in a financial relationship in which Defendants owed it a fiduciary duty due to its

participation

in

venture

the

account for all debits and credits pursuant to the Agreements

6

and distribute net profits accordingly. due

from

Defendants

allowed

to

5

balance

confidence,

pursuant

Agreements.

137. A

in

joint

4

7

Plaintiffs,

the

to

Defendants

Plaintiffs

is

to

only

8

ascertainable through an accounting due to Defendants’ complete

9

failure

10 11 12 13

to

provide

Plaintiffs

with

any

accounting

records,

including the revenue reports, pursuant to the Agreements. 138. As a result, Plaintiffs request for the Court to compel Defendants to account to the Plaintiffs for any money due under the Agreements and all money collected or owed as a result of

14

the sale and distribution of the Game. 15

Count 13: Piercing the Corporate Veil

16 17 18

139. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs 1–138 as if fully set forth herein.

19

140. Plaintiff contends that Corporate Defendant, Maysalward,

20

was the mere alter ego of Mr. Khrais, and the corporate veil

21

should be pierced as a result.

22

141. Specifically, on information and belief, Defendant Nour

23

Khrais exercises complete domination over Maysalward’s finances,

24

policy and business practices to such an extent that Maysalward

25

has no separate mind, will or existence of its own.

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

142. On information and belief, Khrais and other Maysalward officers (if any) did not observe corporate formalities and the officers

did

not

play

a

functioning

role

with

respect

4

Maysalward’s operation at all relevant times to this complaint.

5

Plaintiff did not speak, communicate, contact, meet or email any

6

other member of Maysalward other than Nour Khrais during the

7

relevant time period.

8

143. On information and belief, Khrais, as CEO and founder of

9

Maysalward, treated Maysalward’s bank account as his own, and

10 11 12 13

siphoned funds for his own benefit and other business ventures. 144. The aforesaid control was used by Mr. Khrais to commit the actions complained of above, resulting in significant loss to Plaintiffs from his reckless and wasteful spending, diversion

14

of funds, and loss of Plaintiff’s net profits. 15 16 17 18 19 20

145. Maysalward operated as the alter ego of Mr. Khrais, and the

corporate

entity

should

be

disregarded.

Resultantly,

Maysalward and Mr. Khrais should be treated as one and the same person for purposes of liability. 146. The

fraudulent torts

which

a

Khrais

individually liable. As such, sufficient grounds exist, in and

23

of themselves, for disregarding the corporate form of MD and

24

extending

25

obligations.

Mr.

of

Mr.

22

to

officer

by

constitutes

liability

an

committed

21

personal

for

conduct

Khrais

corporation

for

is

corporate

____________________________________________________________________________________________


PRAYER FOR RELIEF

1 2 3 4 5 6

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court grant the following relief: (a). Award general damages according to proof of trial, but in excess of the jurisdictional limits of this Court; (b). Order

a

constructive

trust

to

compel

Defendants

to

7

deliver the Finished Game, all intellectual property

8

at issue, and Plaintiff’s Net Profits to Plaintiff;

9 10 11 12 13

(c). Award Plaintiffs attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a) and 17 U.S.C. § 505; (d). Award

Plaintiffs

double

damages

for

willful

and

malicious misappropriation of trade secrets pursuant to California Civil Code Section 3426.3;

14

(e). Issue

an

Order

compelling

Defendants

to

prepare

an

15 16 17 18 19

account of the money collected or owed as a result of the

game

distribution

(and

full

disclosure

of

all

books and bank accounts in the US and overseas); (f). An Order establishing that Khrais is the alter ego of

20

defendant

and

therefore

21

damages in this case;

personally

liable

for

all

22

(g). Issue a writ of attachment freezing Defendants’ bank

23

accounts, Apple App. Developer Accounts, and Google

24

wallet merchant accounts in an amount equal to the

25

____________________________________________________________________________________________


1 2 3

amount

of

Plaintiff’s

Net

Profits

due

under

the

Agreements; (h). Issue a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining

4

Defendants,

5

servants,

6

acting in their behalf or in concert with them from:

7

(a)

8

otherwise using, directly or indirectly, Plaintiffs’

9

Game

10 11 12 13

and

each

employees,

marketing,

Concept,

of

their

respective

representatives

selling,

Code,

or

licensing,

Trade

and

agents,

all

others

distributing

Secrets

derived

or

from

Defendant’s unlawful use of the Game; (b) accessing, using,

copying,

selling

or

indirectly,

publishing,

otherwise any

of

disclosing

distributing,

Plaintiffs’

transferring, directly

copyrighted

or

material

14

and any product incorporating or derived from all or 15 16 17 18

part of Plaintiffs’ copyright material; (i). Issue

a

writ

of

attachment

on

Defendants’

bank

account(s), Google Play merchant account(s), and Apple

19

App.

20

related to Plaintiff’s breach of contract and fraud

21

claims;

22 23 24 25

(j). Award

Account(s)

Plaintiffs

to

prevent

pre-judgment

dissolution

and

of

funds

post-judgment

interest; and (k). Award any other and further relief, as the Court deems necessary, just and proper.

____________________________________________________________________________________________


High stakes video game lawsuit  

Siegel Law Group and Law Offices of Nate Kelly file high-stakes mobile app. suit for DreamStone and Tigris Enteratinment against Maysalward...