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.
____________________________________________________________________________________________