Riad v. Lw Wireless, Inc. Et Al 2.13-Cv-02596 Doc 1 Filed 13 May 13

7/30/2019 Riad v. Lw Wireless, Inc. Et Al 2.13-Cv-02596 Doc 1 Filed 13 May 13

1/41

JS 44 civil COVby 1ocof initia

CIVIL COVER SHEETthe information contained herein e i t h ~ r reFlace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadin&s or other papers as requir ed by Jaw, excep. This form, approved by the Judicial q-Onference of the United States in September 1974, is re Ire for the use of the Clerk of Court for theocket sheet. (SEE INSTRUC110NS ONNfXTPAGE OF JHIS FORM.)

(a) PLAINTIFFSJoseph E. Riad

DEFENDANTSLW WIRELESS, INC., WORLD WIDE AUTO SERVICES CENTER, INC.VANNlPA SMITH, VVS 3, INC

/./. . , , . . . , - , , , - ~ - -

/(b)

(c)

County of Residence of First Listed p ~ iff Chester Coun(EXCEPTJN U.S. P F CASES)~ - - - ~

Attorneys (FinnName,Address, andTelepho Number)Mickala Lorraine Rector, Esq., Attorney ID &.:-260445Abbs & Console, LLP

County of Residence of First Listed Defendant(IN U.S. PWNTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE TIIE LOCATIOTHE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.Attorneys (lfKnown)James Barron, Esq. (LW Wireless an d World Wide Auto)

753 S. 13t1t St.Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19147The Levine Firm, LLP, 135-27 38lh Avenue - Suite 120, Flushing, NY 1135Ronald i s ~ , Esq. (V nnipa Smith and/or VVS 3)2020 N. 14 St. Ste. 510Arlington, Va. 22210

OF JURISDICTION (Placean ' ' X " i n O n e B o x O n l ~ J ID. CITIZENSHIP 0 AL PARTIES (Place an ''X" inOneBoxforPlaI U.S. GovernmentPlaintiff2 U.S. GovernmentDefendant

0 3 Federal Question~ : o v e m m e n t Not a Party)~ c a t e Citizenship qfParties in Item Il l)

(For DiversityCitizen of This Stat

Citizen or Subject of aForeign Countty

an d One Box or Defendancorporated or Principal Placeof Business In This Statecorporated and Principal Placeof Business In Another State

Foreign Nation

PTU4

..

5

6 OF SUIT (Place an ''X" in One Box Only)

PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 0 625 Drug Related Seizure 0 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 0 375 False Claims Act0 310 Airplane 0 365 Per.lonal Injury - of Property 21use881 0423 Withdrawal 0 400 State Reapportionm0 315 Airplane Product P r o ~ u c t L i a b i l i t y 0690 Other 28 USC 157 0 410 AntitrustLiability 0 367 He>th Care/ 0 430 Banks and Banking0 320 Assault, Libel & Ph$naceutical ; ; ~ 0 t P R ~ R E R ' . ~ R I G H T S i ; ; ~ J ' . ' ( ! ' j ; ; 0 450 CommerceSlauder Personal Injury 0 820 Copyrights 0 460 Deportation0 330 Federal Employers' Product Liability 0 830 Patent 0 470 Racketeer InfluencLiability 0 368 Asbestos Personal 0 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizati0 340 Marine lnjljry Product 0 480 Consumer CreditO 345 Marine Product Liability i J : ~ ! ~ f ' ; ; ; ; 1 ; , 1 ; : , ; ; , ; , J f i N B 0 R \ ; ; ( . , ; 1 i i : ; ; ~ ; ~ ; " : S t ; i ; ; ~ Y 1 s d e D \ \ 1 1 i S E G U ~ ( ' Z ' ! ' d t \ 1 Y i O 490 Cable/Sat TVLiability PERSONAL PROPERTY 0 710 Fair Labor Standards 0 861 HIA (1395ff) 0 850 Securities/Commo0 350 Motor Vehicle 0 370 Other Fraud Act 0 862 Black Lung (923) Exchange0 355 Motor Vehicle 0 371 Truih in Lending 0720 Labor/Management 0 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 0 890 Other Statutory AcProduct Liability 0 380 Other Personal Relations 0 864 SSID Title XVI 0 891 Agricultural Acts0 360 Other Personal Property Damage 0 740 Railway Labor Act 0 865 RSI (405(g)) 0 893 Environmental MaInjury 0 385 Property Damage 0751 Family and Medical 0 895 Freedom oflnform0 362 Personal lnjwy- Product Liability Leave Act ActMedical Malpractice 0 790 Other Labor Litigation 0 896 Arbitration

;IO


2/41

JCJjoe , o _ _ _ c \IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE E ~ S T E R N DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

iCASE MANAGEMENT TRACK DESIGNATION FORMI CIVIL ACTION

w u> ,re\es-s 1--shc : . : . 13 2 5v.M,t /'w..,TD ~ ' { I I . Ce.n'vf, - s n No. 9 8} f / f 1 ' P ~ n S r c ' J J J t \ c ' e ~ [ { ~ c Y i ~ ~ i g Expense(_a0nd Delay Reduction Plan of this court, counsel forplaintiff shall complete a Case Management Track Designation Form in all civil cases at the time offiling the complaint and serve a copy on all defendants. (See 1 03 of the plan set forth on the reverseside of this form.) In the event that a defendant does not agree with the plaintiff regarding saiddesignation, that defendant shall, with its first appearance, submit to the clerk of court and serve onthe plaintiff and all other parties, Cl; Case Management Track Designation Form specifying the trackto which that defendant believes tme case should be assigned.!SELECT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT TRACKS:

(a) Habeas Corpus - Cases brought under 28 U.S.C. 2241 through 2255.(b) Social Security - Cases requesting review of a decision of the Secretary of Healthand Human Services denying btaintiff Social Security Benefits.

I

(c) Arbitration - Cases required to be designated for arbitration under Local Civil Rule 53.2.I(d) Asbestos - Cases involving claims for personal injury or property damage fromexposure to asbestos.

(e) Special Management - Cases ~ h a t do not fall into tracks (a) through (d) that arecommonly referred to as complex and that need special or intense management bythe court. (See reverse side ofithis form for a detailed explanation of specialmanagement cases.) 1

(f ) Standard Management - C a s e ~ that do not fall into any one of the other tracks.

S- /3 I 'SDate Attorney-at-law;?t) 7qo Jgc, Ci/

Telephone FAX Number

(Ch. 660) 10/02

( )

( )

Case 2:13-cv-02596-LFR Document 1 Filed 05/13/13 Page 2 of 41


3/41

J e 1.!' '.fi. ) I.. 'iJ' .UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DI STRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA - DESIGNATION FORM to be used by counsel to indicate thec.ategory of the case for the purpose of assignment to appropriate c.alendar.Address of Plaintiff: 509 School house Road, Kennett Sg. Pa, 19348Address of Defendant_(D Defendant, Lw Wireless, Inc., and World Wide Auto Services Center,Inc.: 132-33 34th Ave., Flushing, NY 11354 (f_) Defendant Vannipa m i t h , _ ~ ) 16106Atlantis Drive, Bowie, MD, 20716, and, (b) 6037 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, Va.22041; and,(3) Defendant VVS 3, Inc., (Defendant Smith is their President and registered agent) 6037Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, Va. 22041.Place of Accident, Incident or Transaction: The Comglaint involves a contract for the sale of goods abmws) between Plaintiff and L W Wireless/World Wide Auto, a breach and business tortcounts against Vanniua Smith and VVS 3, Inc . who are alleged to have caused saidbreach.

The contract for the sale of goods involved the two bmws as well as a "course ofdealings" between the 12arties: Plaintiff, a Penns)'.lvania resident, and CoIP-QrateDefendants, L W Wireless and World Wide Auto, corporations incorporated inNew York.Defendant Smith, the owner ofVVS 3, Inc., was involved in the course of dealingbetween the 12arties as a broker. Nick Lee-Wang was the agent ofLWWireless and WorldWide Auto, and would purchase cars from Plaintiffon said corporations behalf Both NickLee Wang and Vannipa Smith frequented Pennsylvania to negotiate the transactions whichconstitute the "course ofdealings". A P,redominant amount of he terms of the agreementaffected or were executed in Pennsylvania. For instance, the cars were always located inPennsylvania; Nick/Vannipa and/or a carrier for L W Wireless/World Wide Auto would12ick-uQpurchased cars from Plaintiffs Pennsylvania home and Plaintif fs profits wereultimately deposited in his Pennsylvania account(l

The business torts alleged against VVS 3, Inc. and Vannipa Smith caused harm inPennsylvania, as Plaintiff is a Pennsylvania citizen and the money owed to him would havebeen deposited in his Pennsylvania account. The wire transfer occurred when Ms. Smithused VVS 3's business account to effectuate the final step in her scheme to defraud Plaintiffof$141,139. 00 by converting said money and thereby interfering with Plaintiff and L WWireless/World Wide Auto's contract.

Ms. Smith convinced Nick Lee-Wang to wire the money into her account when shewas inNew York, however. the material misreP,resentations that induced Mr. Lee-WangjQperform said act was as follows: Ms. Smith alleged that she was Plaintiffs "partner", washeading to Pennsylvania and would meet Plaintiff in Pennsylvania and remit said money tohim there. Plaintiff never alleged Ms. Smith was a partner ofhis, nor was there anv.documentation or such expressly or implicitly stating this. Instead, Mr. Lee-Wang believedthis lie based on the numerous times that Ms. Smith had op_P.ortunisticallyJwhen Plaintiffwas out of the room).n:.presented to Mr. Lee-Wang that she was Plaintiffs partner, whilethe parties were conduction ancillary business (sale ofcars). Accordingly_, the predicate

MAY 13 2013'



4/41

misrepresentations often occurred in Pennsylvania Furthermore, the false promisesinvolved Pennsylvanijb as Ms .. Smith's reason for requesting the wire transfer was that shewas "en route to Pennsylvania" and would remit said money "in Pennsylvania".

(Use Reverse Side For Additional Space)Does this civil action involve a nongovernmental corporate party with any parent corporation and any publicly held corporationowning 10% or more of its stock?

(Attach two copies of the Disclosure Statement Form in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 7. l(a)) Yes 0/':.;-is case involve multidistrict litigation possibilities?

~ l . A T E D CASE, IF ANY:Yeso

Case Number: __________ udge_____________Date Terminated:Civil cases are deemed related when yes is answered to any of the following questions:1. Is this case related to property included in an earlier numbered suit pending or within one year previously terminated action inthis court?N . - . ~ YesOf oo e s this c a s ~ involve the same issue of fact or grow out of the same transaction as a prior suit pending or within one yearprevious!y terminated

action in this court?YesO~. Does this case involve the validity or infringement of a patent already in suit or any earlier numbered case pending or within one

year previously /terminated action in this court? Yes0 ~

4. Is this case a second or successive habeas corpus, social secu rity appeal, or prose civil rights case filed by the ; i : i 1 ~ d i v i d u a l ?YesO ~

CIVIL: (Place t / in ONE CATEGORY ONLY)A. Federal Question Cases:Cases;1. o Indemnity Contract, Marine Contract, and All Other Contractsand Other Contracts2. o FELAInjury3. o Jones Act-Personal InjuryDefamation4. D AntitrustInjury5. D PatentPersonal Injury6. o Labor-Management RelationsInjury (Plea


5/41

8. o Habeas Corpus- Asbestos9. o Securities Act(s) CasesDiversity Cases10. o Social Security Review Cases(Please specify)11. o All other Federal Question Cases

(Please specify)

ARBITRATION CERTIFICATION(Check Appropriate Category)

8. o Products Liability

9. o All other

I, Mickala Lorraine Rector ~ , counsel of record do hereby certify:O Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 53.2, Section 3(c)(2), that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the damages recoverable in

this civil action case exceed the sum of $150,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs;o Relief other than monetary damages is sought.

DATE: __M!y...!J, 2013260445Attorney l.D.#

Attorney-at-LawNOTE: A trial de novo will be a trial by jury only if there has been compliance with F.R.C.P. 38.

I certify that, to my knowledge, the within case is no t related to any case now pending or within one year previouslyterminated action in this courtexcept as noted above.D A T E : ~ _ . . . . M = a ~ y . . ! J , 2 0 1 3260445Attorney I.D.#CIV. 609 (5/2012)

#-? .Attorney-at-Law



6/41

Mickala Lorraine Rector, EsquireAttorney ID NO.: 260445Abbs & Console, LLP753 S. 13th StreetPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania 19147Attorney for Plaintiff, Joseph E. Riad

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOSEPH E. RIADKENNETT SQUARE, PENNSYLVANIA 19

Plaintiff,v. CIVIL ACTION NO.

2598- - - -LW WIRELESS, INC.

FLUSHING, NEW YORKAndWORLD WIDE AUTO SERVICESCENTER, INC.FLUSHING, NEW YORKandVANNIPA SMITH,FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIAandVVS 3, INC.FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA

Defendants.

CIVIL COMPLAINTAND JURY DEMAND

NATURE OF ACTION1. This is an action for an award of damages, declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney'sfees and other relief on behalf of Plaintiff, Joseph E. Riad.2. This action is brought pursuant to following state causes of action: fraud, interference of



7/41

contract, conversion, unjust enrichment, piercing the corporate veil and breach of contract.JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 USC l 332(a)(l) because theamount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00 and there is diversity of citizenship.4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the above captioned defendants.5. Venue is properly laid under 28 US.C. 1391 (b)(2), as a substantial amount of thecomplained of events occurred within this Court's jurisdiction.

PARTIES:6. Plaintiff, Joseph Riad, ("Plaintiff or "Mr. Riad"), at all relevant times herein was acting inhis individual capacity and not on behalf of any business entity.7. Defendant Vannipa Smith, ("Ms. Smith"), at all relevant times herein, was the registeredagent ofVVS 3, Inc. ("VVS 3") and was acting as its agent and/or owner. 1 Alternatively,Defendant Smith was acting in her individual capacity and utilized her business' bank accountsto facilitate the conduct complained of herein. X5M Wire Details, ("Exhibit A") (showingtransfer of funds into "[Ms. Smith's] Company( ... . 3168)") and 1012112012 Email, Nick Wang("Exhibit B") (identifying Ms. Smith's Company, for purposes of the wire transfers, as VVS 3,Inc.).8. Defendant L W Wireless, Inc. ("L W Wireless") and World Wide Auto Service Center,Inc. ("World Wide Auto") are owned and operated by CEO, Steve Wang 2. At all relevant times

1 Per the State Corporation Commission of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Ms. Smith is the registered agent and/orofficer for VVS 3 Inc., SCC ID: 07406044.2 New York Department of State, Division of Corporations, Entity Information lists Steve Wang as the CEO of LWWireless Inc., DOS No.: 3773679. Steve Wang and Nick Lee Wang have both represented to Plaint iff that LWWireless and World Wide Auto Services Center, Inc. are owned by Steve and operated by Steve and Nick.2



8/41

herein, Steve and Nick Lee-Wang were agents ofboth Defendant Corporations. BothDefendants having a business address of 132-33 34th Street, Flushing, New York, 11354.

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS:9. Beginning on or about July 27, 2012, VVS 3 Inc., by and through its alter ego, DefendantSmith, defrauded Plaintiffofapproximately $141,139.00.10. This occurred when Ms. Smith, VVS 3's President, used VVS 3's s business bankaccount (Account No.: ... 3168), converted said funds3, belonging to Plaintiff under a salescontract between himself and LW Wireless/World Wide Auto (see infra, ifl l-20), via bankfraud4, 18 US.C. 1344(2). (explained infra).Sales Contract-Course of Dealings11. Nick and Steve, from on or about early 2012 through present, entered into agreements forthe sale ofvehicles owned by Plaintiff. Affidavit ofPlaintiff, Joseph E. Riad, pg. 1,2 ("ExhibitC"); Bills ofLaiding, ("Exhibit D").

Location, Discussions and Pick-up of Vehicles, Chester County, Pennsylvania12. At all relevant times herein, the vehicles were always located at one ofPlaintiffsPennsylvania homes: Kennett Square, Pennsylvania, or Nottingham, Pennsylvania. Ex. C., if 8.13. All defendants were aware that said cars were located at one of he above Pennsylvaniaaddresses, as, inter alia: (a.) Plaintiff expressly informed them of the cars locations multipletimes; and (b.) Nick and Ms. Smith have met to discuss negotiations or pending transactions inPennsylvania on numerous occasions.

3 The money was wired into Ms. Smith's business account (VVS3 Inc.) Account No.: XXXX3168. X5M WireDetail, ("Exhibit A'').4 Plaintiff doesn 't allege that Ms. Smith has been charged or convicted ofbank fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1344(2), as of hedate of his Complaint. However, Plaintiff contends that the allegations and averments contained herein make out aprima facie showing of bank fraud as a matter oflaw.

3



9/41

14. The terms of the transactions, whether express or imputed as a course of performanceunder the Universal Commercial Code ("UCC"), have always had the vehicles picked up inPennsylvania: (a.) Mr. Wang and Ms. Smith have personally driven to ofPlaintiffs Pennsylvaniahomes to take possession of said car on multiple occasions, Ex. C, pg. 1; and,(b.) Regardless of shipping or e l i v ~ r y method, the vehicles have always originated fromPennsylvania, and the Bills ofLaidi:o.g5 have always reflected such. Ex. D.

Payment15. Plaintiff believes and therefore alleges that all profits derived from the transactions weredeposited in one ofPlaintiffs Pennsylvania bank accounts. Ex. C, ~ 1 4 .16. In all transactions, Plainti ff expressly required that Nick and/or Steve give payment onlyto Plaintiff. Ex. C, ~ 1 4 . The course of dealings between the parties was that, payment would bemade only to Plaintiff, by sending a cashier 's check to Plaintiff. Ex. C, ~ 1 4 .July 2012, Agreement17. On or about July 2012, Nick, on behalf of World Wide Auto, LW Wireless and Steve,entered into an agreement with Plaintiff for the sale of Plaintiffs x5m BMW (special package)($66,445.00) and an x6 ($72,748.00) BMW. Ex. C, 17; Invoice# 003, ("Exhibit E").18. Under said agreement, J;>laintiff was to receive approximately $2,000.00 fortransportation and other such expem;;es. Ex. C, 17.19. Excepting such things as th,e price and specific car, the terms of this agreement, bothexpress and imputed under the UCC, as a "course of dealings", were the same as stated in ~ 1 2 -14, 16.20. Plaintiffs recollection is that the x5m and x6 BMWs were purchased by Plaintiff usingfunds in his Pennsylvania checking account.5 The vehicles were delivered to Newark, New Jersey.

4



10/41

21. Plaintiff intended to deposit, the $141,193.00 owed to him by LW Wireless and WorldWide Auto into his Pennsylvania h ~ c k i n g account. Ex. C, ii 14.Plaintifrs $141,193.00 Wired intolMs. Smith's Account22. On or about July 27, 2012, ~ i c k wired the $141,139.00 he owed Plaintiff under the aboveagreement, iill-20, into VVS 3's bank account (Act. No.: ... 3168). Ex. A; Ex. B;Confession/Guarantee Vannipa Smifh, ("Exhibit F").

i

23. Nick represented to Plaintifflthat he wired Ms. Smith the $141,139.00, instead of sendingPlaintiff a cashier's check, because Ms. Smith falsely represented that she a.) was Plaintiff's"partner", b.) was en route to Plaintiiffs Pennsylvania residence, and c.) would remit the wiredmoneys to Plaintiff while she was in Pennsylvania. Ex. C, ii 23.24. Nick represented to Plaintiff that for a period of time prior to the wire, Ms. Smith woulduse opportunities where Plaintiff had stepped away to falsely represent that she and Plaintiffwere partners. At no point in time did Plaintiff know of said representations or himself representthat Ms. Smith was his partner. Ex. C, ii JO, 24.25. Plaintiff believes and therefore alleges that said misrepresentations were made to induceNick into wiring Plaintiff 's $141,193.00 payment so that Ms. Smith could retain the wiredmonies Ex. C, ii 27.26. It has been represented to P l ~ i n t i f f , by Defendant Smith, that she wired some of heconverted funds, than in the custody and control ofVVS 3 and/or Vannipa's Thai Restaurant,(Defendant Smith's foreign corporation registered in Virginia), overseas to family members.27. Defendant Smith had control over VVS 3, to the extent that it was her alter ego. It ispresumed that Defendant Smith chose to utilize this alter ego, as opposed to using her personalaccount because, inter alia, requesting a wire transfer into a business account, as opposed to a

5



11/41

personal account, helped facilitate the rouse of corporate partnership, and/or enabled funds to bewired overseas.28. VVS 3' s annual report6 lists Vannipa Smith as President and Xiaolan Zhang as aDirector. Since it has been ten months since Defendant Smith converted $141,139.00 by usingVVS 3's bank account, and Mr. Zhang has failed to notice, report or account on the unauthorizedand unaccounted for transaction, Plaint iff believes that any corporate formalities alleged to existby Defendant Smith have not adequately been followed.29. In a handwritten, signed letter, dated October 22, 2012, Ms. Smith made the followingconfession and guarantee to repay Plaintiff for said wire transfer:

"I , Vannipa Smith, license no: S-530-839-014-906 [DOB] 11-27-1956" ... [Algree to repay Joseph Riad for (sic, For in original) $168,000.007that I received in my account for his x5mm and x6." [emphasisadded]." Ex. F.30. At the time the money was wired, Ms. Smith, VVS 3 nor any other entity had Plaintiff'spermission to accept the wired funds on his behalf. Ex. C, ,-i 27.LW Wireless and World Wide Auto31. At the time the money was wired, Nick did not have Plaintiff's permission to deviatefrom the agreement by wiring the $141,193.00 into Ms. Smith 's account. Ex. C, ,-i 27.32. Nearly contemporaneous with this wire transfer, the x5m and x6 BMWs were picked upfrom Plaintiffs Pennsylvania residence. LW Wireless and World Wide Auto, and or its agent(s)or representative(s), accepted the x5m and x6 BMWs. 13 Pa. C.S. 2606(a)(l), (a)(2), and/or(a)(3). Ex. C, ,-i 35.

6 A copy is currently in the possession ofPlaintiff. Further, it can be accessed at http://sccintemet.scc.virginia.gov/coi:porate/arfilings/coi:pfilings.asp?chartemumber=07406044 by using the corporate ID:07406044.7 Ms. Smith guaranteed to repay Plaintiff$168,000.00, an amount in excess of he $141, 193.00 wire, based onfactors including Plaintiffs time and expenses and mutually agreed upon interest of approximately I 0%. Saidinterest was based on repayment on or about October, and binds the parties only as a minimum floor.6



12/41

33. Upon learning of the payment deviation, Plaintiff immediately called Nick and orderedhim to reverse the transfer and tender payment to Plaintiff Ex. C, ii27-32.34. Nick represented to Plaintiff that he attempted the reverse wire, but the bank refused. Ex.C, ii 30.35. As this was unacceptable to Plaintiff, Nick promised to tender payment shortly thereafter,should the "trusted" Ms. Smith fail to pay Plaintiff as she had promised. Ex. C, ii 27-34. Nickadditionally promised to sign an IOU as a form of security until Ms. Smith remitted payment.Ex. C, ii 32.36. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that LW Wireless and/or World Wide Auto madeapproximately $200,000.00 on the sale of the x5m BMW and $250,000.00 on the sale of the x6BMW. Ex. C, ii 32.37. LW Wireless and World Wide Autos have been in receipt of an invoice for the x5m andx6 BMWs since on or about September 1, 2012. Ex. E. No payment has been made to date onthis invoice. Ex. C, ii 41.Ms. Smith's Response38. Plaintiff also immediately called Ms. Smith and ordered her to remit the wired money toPlaintiff Ex. C, ii 36, 37.39. Initially Ms. Smith promised to drive to Pennsylvania and tender payment. Ex. C, ii 36.Plaintiff had no choice but to accept Ms. Smith's initial promises as Nick and the bank wereunable/unwilling to perform a reverse wire transfer and return Plaintiff's money. Ex. C, ii 28-31.40. Ms. Smith never returned the wired money and shortly after obtaining said money, Ms.Smith stopped taking Plaintiff's calls and emails. Ex. C, ii 37.

7



13/41

41. At this time, Ms. Smith had flaintiffs passport in her possession, as she had obtained itsome ten days earlier for the purpose of purchasing a (separate) x5 BMW for Plaintiff. Ex. C, ii37.42. To the extent Plaintiff was alple to contact Ms. Smith between the months of July 2012and October 2012, Ms. Smith would deviate from threatening to destroy or withhold Plaintiff'spassport, which she knew he needed for international business ventures, to offering falsestatements about her geographic whereabouts (stating she was in Thailand). Ex. C, ii 37, 39.43. As stated supra, on October 22, 2012, Plaintiff drove to Ms. Smith's restaurant,Vannipa's Thia Restaurant, and confronted her about the $141, 139.00, a separate x5 BMW ofPlaintiffs she had taken and his p a s ~ p o r t that had been held for six months under threat ofdestruction.

"I, Vannipa Smith .. [a]gree to return Joseph Riad 's passport .. I agree torepay Joseph Riad fot the car taken from BMW Silver Spring (separate x5referenced in precedi:ng paragraphs) ... I agree to repay Joseph Riad for$168,000 that I receiyed in my account for his x5m and x6." Ex. F.44. Ms. Smith has not made a single payment on any moneys referenced above. Ex. C, ii 43.

COUNT ONE-PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL(JOSEPH E. RIAD V. VVS 3, INC. AND VANNIPA SMITH)

45. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1through44 of this Complaint as if fullyset forth herein.46. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Smith was the alter ego ofVVS 3, Inc.,a company she was the President and Officer of This allegation is premised on, inter alia,

8



14/41

(a) the fact that she was abl9 to use VVS 3's business account to facilitate the bank fraud!that converted Plaintiff of hif property interest in $141, 193. 00 and thereby unjustlyienriched Defendant Smith/\ifVS 3, Inc., See e.g., ii 9, 10, 22-2T;I

(b) the fact that Xiaolan Zharg, the only listed Officer on VVS 3 s annual report, hasIeither been acting in concert with Ms. Smith or been removed from control andI

accounting formalities to !hi extent he/she failed to notice an unaccounted for credit of$141,193.00, See e.g., 28; I

Ii( c) subsection (b) further in'1icates that there are no regularly adhered to corporateI

formalities,( d) the representation by Defendant Smith that she was able to wire some or all of said

I

moneys overseas, See e.g., i 26;!

(e) the fact that the fore menitioned constitutes co-mingling of personal and corporateiassets in addition to fraud; afid!(f) the fact that her written cpnfession, shows Ms. Smith herself doesn't recognize aIdistinction between her inditidual selfand her corporate self: when conceding liability!Iand debt, she refers to herser in an individual capacity, using identifiers such as her

birthday and driver's l i c e n s e ~ as opposed to VVS 3's corporate ID and date ofIIincorporation, See e.g., ii 28.jI

I8 Any reference to specific numerical paragfaphs, in this paragraph and all other paragraphs herein, is meant solelyas an aid to the reader and in no way is intTded to omit any other relevant paragraph.9



15/41

COUNT T 0-CONVERSION ($141, 139.00)(JOSEPH E. RIA V. VVS 3, INC. AND VANNIPA SMITH)

47. Plaintiff incorporates by refi rence paragraphs 1 through 46 of this Complaint as if fullyset forth herein.48. Plaintiff had a property inter st and right to the $141,193.00 under the sales contractbetween himself, LW Wireless, Wold Wide Auto, Nick Lee-Wang and Steve Wang. See e.g., i18, 11-14, 16-19.49. VVS 3, Inc., by and through its agent and alter ego, Defendant Smith "assumed"Plaint iffs property interest and "ex rcised dominion and control" in the $141, 193. 00 when sheconvinced Nick to wire said money nto the VVS 3 account. See e.g., i122-30.50. VVS 3, Inc., by and through its agent and alter ego, Ms. Smith has continued to "exercisedominion and control" and util izes id money as Ms. Smith's own, to the exclusion of Plaintiffsrights, as she has failed to remit sai money to Plaintiff for approximately ten months. See e.g.,i125-28, 29, 44.51. This exercise of dominion a ' d control over Plaintiffs property was unauthorized andwithout legal justification, as Plaintf did not consent to this transfer or retention of his property.See e.g., i116-20, 24, 29-31, 38-44. IFurther, it is uncontested Ms. Smith has no legal interest insaid property. See e.g., i124, 29.52. Plaintiff compensatory harm is valued at approximately, $141,193. 00, plus interest.53. VVS 3, Inc., by and through its agent and alter ego, Ms. Smith, acted with "actualmalice" and/or the conduct was "ou ageous" because:

a.) Defendants acts constituted criminal offenses under both state and federal law,including 18 U.S.C. 1344(2/ (bank fraud);

9 "Whoever knowingly executes, or attemp s to execute, a scheme or artifice--10



16/41

b.) Congress found the arm caused by such conduct sufficient to warrant up to thirty

c.) Ms. Smith's fraud w s not an isolated act, asfraud, 18 US.C. 1344(2/0, defrauding Plaintiffof his x5m

BMW approximate! ten days earlier; and,ii.) upon information and belief, has defrauded others ofmoney, such as VincentZhang; and,

d.) Ms. Smith has conti uously promised to repay Plaintiff, but has failed to makerestitution as of the te of this Complaint.

COUNT TH E-INTERFERENCE OF CONTRACT(JOSEPH E. RIA I V. VVS 3, INC. AND VANNIPA SMITH)

54. Plaintiff incorporates by refi rence paragraphs 1through53 of this Complaint as if fullyset forth herein.55. There was a valid agreemen between Mr. Riad and LW Wireless, World Wide Auto,Nick Lee-Wang and Steve Wang, fi r the sale of an x5m BMW and an x6 BMW for a total priceof $141,193.00. See e.g., 8, 11-1 , 16-19.56. Ms. Smith, and thereforels 3, Inc., had knowledge of this agreement. See e.g., ii 14,22-27, 29.57. Ms. Smith made false repreJentations to Mr. Wang with the objective of convincing Mr.Wang to wire the money owed Plai ' ti ff into her account in lieu ofpaying Plaintiff See e.g.,

~ 2 2 - 2 6 , 30, 38-44.(2)to obtain an of he mane s funds ere "ts assets, securities, or other property owned by, or under the custody orcontrol of a financial institution b means of false or fraudulent retenses re resentations or rornises;shall be fined not more than $1, 000, 000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.10 Plaintif fdoesn't allege that Ms. Smith h s been charged or convicted ofbank fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1344(2), as of hedate of his Complaint. However, Plaintiff contends that the allegations and averments contained herein make out aprima facie showing of bank fraud as a mater oflaw.

11



17/41

i

58. Said acts caused the breac1s referred to infra in Counts SIX and SEVEN.59. Ms. Smith and VVS 3, Inc. were without legal justification as Plaintiff did not consent tothis transfer or retention ofhis pro erty. See e.g., 16-20, 24, 29-31, 38-44. Further, it isuncontested Ms. Smith and VVS 3 Inc., has never had any legal interest in said property. Seee.g., ~ 2 4 , 29.60. Plainti ff compensatory ha is valued at approximately, $141,193.00, plus interest.61. Defendants VVS 3 and Smi h acted with "actual malice" and/or the conduct was"outrageous" because:

a.) Defendants acts con tituted criminal offenses under both state and federal law,including 18 US. C. 1344(2) (bank fraud);

b.) Congress found the l .rm caused by such conduct sufficient to warrant up to thirtyears in federal riJn. 18 U.S.C. 1344(2);

c.) Ms. Smith's fraud w snot an isolated act, asi.) she committedb t raud, 18 US.C. 1344(2), defrauding Plaintif f ofhis x5mBMW p p r o x i m a t e l ~ ten days earlier; and,

iii.) upon informatio and belief, has defrauded others ofmoney, such as VincentZhang; and,

d.) Ms. Smith has conti uously promised to repay Plaintiff, but has failed to makerestitution as of the r t e of this Complaint.

I

12



18/41

OUNT FOUR-FRAUD(JOSEPH E. RIAD V. VVS 3, INC., AND VANNIPA SMITH)

62. Plaintiff incorporates by refl ence paragraphs 1 through 61 of this Complaint as if fullyset forth herein.63. Ms. Smith devised a scheme or trick to defraud Plaintiff of $141, 193. 00. See e.g., ii 9,JO, 25, 26, 29, 30, 38-44.64. Specifically, Ms. Smith con inced Nick into wiring $141,193.00, owed under thecontract referenced in ii11-20 ofthi Complaint, into VVS 3'S business account. See e.g., ii 9,JO, 22-30.65. Ms. Smith induced Nick int the wire transfer by misrepresenting to him that she wasPlaintiffs partner, was en route to Pelnnsylvania to meet with Plaintiff and would remit saidfunds to Plaintiff See e.g., ii 22-25, 38-44.66. Ms. Smith made this misrep esentation with scienter, as she knew she was not Plaintiffsbusiness partner, See e.g., ii 24, and intended for the misleading statements to induce Nick Wanginto wiring money owed Plaintiff info the VVS 3 account. See e.g., ii 24-27, 29, 30. Further,Ms. Smith has engaged in a course t f conduct that shows an intent to evade Plaintiff, See e.g., ii40, 43, and coerce him into relinqui hing interest in his money. See e.g., ii 40-42.67. Nick Wang relied on Ms. S , th's representations when wiring money into Ms. Smith'sbusiness account. See e.g., ii 22-24.68. As a result, Plaintiff has suf fred harm valued at approximately, $141,193.00, plusinterest. I69. VVS 3, Inc. and Ms. Smith'j acted with "actual malice" and/or the conduct was"outrageous" because:

13



19/41

a.) Defendants acts cjos tuted criminal offenses under both state and federal law, 18U.S.C. 1344(2) (b fraud);Congress found the arm caused by such conduct sufficient to warrant up to thirty.)

c.) Ms. Smith's fraud w snot an isolated act, as

d.)

fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1344(2), defrauding Plaintiffofhis x5mBMW approximate! ten days earlier; and,ii.) upon information and belief, has defrauded others ofmoney, such as VincentZhang; and, IMs. Smith has conti,ously promised to repay Plaintiff, but has failed to makerestitution as of the te of this Complaint.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment, jointly and severally, against Defendants VVS 3,Inc., and Vannipa Smith as follows:

A. For compensato damages, in the amount of $141,193.00, plus interest;B. For treble damag s,C. For punitive dam ges;D. For attorneys' fe s; and,E. For any and all o er relief deemed just and proper including declaratory andinjunctive relief.

14



20/41

COUNT FIVE-GUA NTOR OF DEBT(ADDITIONALLY ORALTER ATIVELY TO COUNT ONE)(JOSEP E. RIAD V. VANNIPA SMITH)

70. Plaintiff incorporates by refi rence paragraphs 1 through 69 of this Complaint as if fullyset forth herein.71. On October 22, 2012, Ms. mith guaranteed the debt owed by any party arising out of thewire transfer alleged above, in wrifng. See e.g., ii 29.72. Any amount of debt, owed 'Y any party, including debt ofVVS 3, Inc., found not to beattributable to Ms. Smith under the octrine of piercing the corporate veil, was accepted up to$168,000.00 as of the date of said riting. See e.g., ii 29.WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Vannipa Smith, for any amountfound attributable only to VVS 3, I c., or any other entity liable under the above counts, asfollows:

A. For guarantor of debt, up to $168,000.00, plus interestB. For attorneys' fefs; and,C. For any and all fther relief deemed just and proper including declaratory and

injunctive relief1

COUNT SIX-BREACH OF CONTRACT(JOSEPH E. RIAD V. LW WI LESS, INC., AND WORLD WIDE AUTO SERVICECENER, INC.)

73. Plaintiff incorporates by re erence paragraphs 1 through 72 of this Complaint as if fullyset forth herein. ,74. The agreement or "bargain ~ f the parties, in fact, as found in their express language andcourse of dealings", 13 Pa.CS. 1201(b)(3), 1205(a), required the Corporate Defendants, byand through their agent(s), Nick W ng and/or Steve Wang, to pay Plaintiff $141,193.00 and the$2,000.00 in additional expenses. 'ee e.g., ii 8, 16-19.

15



21/41

75. The agreement or "bargain of the parties, in fact, as found in their express language andcourse of dealings", 13 Pa.CS. 120l(b)(3), 1205(a), required the Corporate Defendants, byand through their agent(s), Nick ang and/or Steve Wang, to pay Plaintiff said money at orbefore the time Plaintifftransferre possession and title. Alternatively, 13 Pa.CS. 2310(1),(2)required same. See e.g., 8, 16-19.76. Contemporaneous or near y contemporaneous with Nick Wang's failure to tenderpayment, Plaintiff transferred po session and title of the above referenced BMWs to thecorporate defendants, and had in al other respects performed all conditions, covenants, promises,duties, and responsibilities require of him to be performed in accordance and in conformity withthe parties agreement. See e.g., 3 .77. The above corporate defen 1ants have failed to perform under the agreement, as to datepayment has not been tendered to P aintiff See e.g., 22, 31, 37.78. The actions cited in 77, namely failing to tender payment to Plaintiff, constitutes abreach of contract.79. Plaintiff has suffered finan ial loss as a result of said breach in the amount of $141,193.00, plus interest.

COUNT S VEN-BREACH OF CONTRACT(JOSEPH E. RIAD V. LW LESS, INC., AND WORLD WIDE AUTO SERVICE

CENER, INC.)80. Plaintiff incorporates by re rence paragraphs 1 through 79 of this Complaint as if fullyset forth herein.81. The bargain of the parties, in fact, as found in their express language and course ofdealings, applied under the UCC, equired payment to be tendered (via cashier 's check), givenonly to Plaintiff. See e.g., 16-19, 1.

16



22/41

82. Prior to Nick Wang's trans er of $141,193.00 on or about July 27, 2012, Plaintiff hadperformed all conditions, covenant , promises, duties, and responsibilities required of him to beperformed in accordance and in con ormity with the parties agreement. See e.g., i-f 31, 32.83. The actions of the Corpora e Defendant's, by and through Nick Wang, in transferring$141,193.00, owed Plaintiff, to s. Smith's business account in lieu of sending Plaintiff acashier's check, constitutes a breac of contract. See e.g., i-f 18-21.84. Plaintiff has suffered fina cial loss as a result of said breach m the amount of$141,193.00, plus interest. See e.g., i-f 36.WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demand judgment, jointly and severally, against Defendants LWWireless, Inc., and World Wide Aut Service Center, Inc., as follows:

A For compensato damages, in the amount of, $141,193.00, plus interest;B. For any and all ot er relief deemed just and proper including declaratory andinjunctive relief.

COUNT EIGHT-UNJUST EN CHMENT (ALTERNATIVE TO COUNTS SIX ANDSEVEN)(JOSEPH E. RIAD V. LW WIRE ESS, INC., AND WORLD WIDE AUTO SERVICECENER, INC.)85. Plaintiff incorporates by refi rence paragraphs 1 through 84 of this Complaint as if fullyset forth herein.86. The benefit of the x5m B and the x6 BMW were conferred on the corporatedefendants, as possession and title said cars was transferred by Plaintiff to said defendants.See e.g., i-f 32.87. The corporate defendants ha e appreciated the benefit of the above referenced BMWs asthere was an actual and legal accep ce of the x5m and x6 BMWs and the concomitant profit of$200,000.00 and $250,000.00 respe tively. See e.g., i-f 32, 36.

17



23/41

88. Acceptance and retention o the two vehicles, valued collectively at or around$450,000.00, would be inequitable or the corporate defendants to retain without payment ofvalue to Plaintiff.89. Plaintiff has suffered fin cial loss as a result of this unjust enrichment, valued at$450,000.00, plus interest. See e.g. i! 32, 36, 37.WHEREFORE, Plaintif f deman s judgment, jointly and severally, against Defendants L WWireless, Inc., and World Wide Au o Service Center, Inc., as follows:

A For restitution damages of the value of the benefit conferred on thecorporate defendant , in $450,000.00, plus interest;B. For any and all ot er relief deemed just and proper including declaratory andinjunctive relief.

Respectfully submitted,

Mickala Lorraine Rector, Esq.Attorney ID NO.: 260445Abbs & Console, LLPAttorney for Plaintiff, Joseph E. Riad

18



24/41

XHIBIT A



25/41

:HASEO Chase.com I Contact Us I Privacy Notice I En Espanol IlalMy Accounts Payments & Transfers Products Services I Customer Center

payments & Iransfem >Wire Act!ylly > Wire Detail

Wire Detail o Help with this page I'd like to Review this request - Read and onfirm the details for this wire request. Click"Wire ActMly" to go back on the Activity page.

Wire Details

Wire to van lpas Company( ..3168)Wire from BU INESS CLASSIC ( ..9059)

\ i ! i r e ? ~ t . i t $ .Wire amount 674 4.00 U.S. Dollars (USO)

Scheduled On 6 07'2712012 at 05:03 PM ETiWire date 07/3012012

Measage to recipient6 Re X6FundMessage to recipient bank X6 und

Memo6 X6 undTransactionnumber 491 534068

Fed reference number NIA

Add a recipient See wjre acl!vj!y See/URdate rec1p;en1& See more choices



26/41

EXHIBITB



27/41

Fw: Statement on two wired F nds1 messageJoseph Riad < [email protected]>Reply-To: Joseph Riad To: Mickala rector

----- Forwarded Message -----From: Nicholas W To: "Enedy, Scott M" Cc: [email protected]: Sunday, October 21, 2012 11 :15 AMSubject: Statement on two wired FundsDear Officer Scott,

Kala Rector< [email protected]>

Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:34 PM

The two funds that have wired to VVS3 INC (Vannipa Smith's Company) were for Mr. JosephRiad. II have sent you both receipts before. P l ~ a s e be advised.

II fyou have any questions please c o n t a ~ me at any time.

Nick Le \NangUV \Virdess lnc.718-501-1{?87

III

https://mail.google. o m / m a i l l ? u i ~ 2 & i k ~ 3 c r 0 d 7 7 5 a & v i e W ' 1 ' t & q ' " j r i a d % 4 0 r i a d h o l d i n g s . c o . . . 51412013I



28/41

EXHIBITC



29/41

JOSEPH RIAD, being duly sw m according to law upon his oath, deposes and says:1. I am a resident of hesf fPennsylvania with a primary residence in

Nottingham, Pennsylv,a.2. I also have a residence ii Kennett Square, Pennsylvania.

Relationship between Parties:3. I met V annipa Smith thr 1 ugh a mutual acquaintance. Several days after meeting

her, she introduced met Nick lee Wang(lc wireless) and Steven Wang of(World Wide Automotiv s .

4. Shortly thereafter, Nick d Jason traveled to my Pennsylvania residence to lookat a car I owned. Nick urchased the car while in Pennsylvania.

5. Ms. Vannipa Smith acc+panied them on this business endeavor.6. After that purchase smoothly, Nick and Jason, on behalf of World Wide

IAutomotive purchased ,ore ofmy cars.7. When they came to Pen1'sylvania, Ms. Smith would either accompany them down

or meet them at my housb (as she lived in Virginia). She came frequently withJason and his , r , ; l':f ~ j , \ 1 1 ' , ~ o n ~ ~ ~ l ' l \ ' ~ t \ 1 ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ 'll,\?i ! ~ '"'P'A ' '" """

8. Tue cars purchased r o ~ l ~ e were always located in Pennsylvania and alwayspicked up by Nick, Jaso, or a carrier from one ofmy Pennsylvania residences.Ms. Vannipa Smith 1

1

9. Ms. V annipa Smith has ,lso come to Pennsylvania to negotiate separatetransactions with me. ThtY were primarily loans that I rejected, and investments

!

in her business plans I had no interest in.lO. I have never been Ms. S+ith's partner in any business endeavor, nor have I

represented that I was Mt. Smith 's business partner.



30/41

11. Consistent with this, the I ars I sold to Nick, Steve and/or World WideAutomotive have always been in my name.

12. My understanding is tha in many or all of these transactions, Vannipa served asthe buyer's broker. II13. Prior to July 27, 2012, nf person ever asked me ifVannipa was my partner, nordid any person make an1 statement that indicate that they labored under thatmisunderstanding. ilPa ments made Exclus vel to Me:

14. I always required payme t to be made only to me; and, Nick sent cashier 's checksto one of my houses. I

15. The profits from these s1les were deposited in one or both ofmy Chester County,Pennsylvania banks. I

I

16. V annipa Smith has nevet had access to any of hese accounts, signing authority orany property interests. I never had any property interest in any of V annipaSmith's bank accounts. I

i

Sales Transaction Giv Rise to Com laint:17. On or before July 27, 20r ick contacted me to negotiate the purchase of an

x5m (special order) and I 6 BMW. Per this agreement I was to be paid $139,193.00 plus two thousanf for ordering the cars. Ifl was to order a car, I wouldcharge 1000 dollars per tar, to cover all my expenses.

18. As always, the vehicles ere located in one of my Pennsylvania houses and Nickwas to remit payment 04y to myself.

19. The vehicles were picket up from my Pennsylvania house and delivered toNick/Steven/World Widt Automotive in Newark, New Jersey or to the port inNY.. I

I

Nick Wired my Money r a n n i ~ a :



31/41

20. On or about Ju1y 27, 2 0 ~ 2 , Vannipa convinced Nick Wang ('"Nick") to wire. !$139,193.00 mto her acfount.

I21. I have never given pem)ission to V annipa, Nick, Steve World Wide AutomotivesiIor any other person or $.tity for that matter, to wire my money into Vannipa's'

bank account.22. On or about the day I Itamed of the wire transfer, I was furious and called Nick

1to ask him why he had lone such a thing.I23. Nick represented to melthat he did this because Vannipa told him that her and I

were partners. Nick h e r stated that V annipa told him that she was en route toIIPennsylvania and wou1f remit the wired money to me there.l24.I told Nick that this wa.$ ridiculous as I had never stated or even implied that!Vannipa was my a r t n ~ r .

25. I asked Nick why he difn't call me to confirm such a statement before wiringover a hundred thousa4d dollars ofmy money into some woman's account.

26. He said he trusted her e c a u s e his roommate from college that introduced her toIIhim called her mom, a.fd she was an older Asian lady, and he trusted her becauseI .she delivered cars to h i ~ .

Demand for Reverse-Wire T*ansfer27. During this discussion, ji demanded that Nick have his bank perform a reverse-

]wire immedietly, as he pad no right or permission to transfer my money toIV annipa, and V annipa no right to accept my money. The mere fact she lied

to him and said to him i wou1d be ok with that freaked me out and I wasIconvinced there is somtthing wrong here. I told him this is my money and if I

Iwanted to give it to vanlnipa, I wou1d have done it myself.I



32/41

28. At the time I made this demand ofNick, I informed him that banks wouldordinarily perform reverse-wire transfers, especially in fraud situations, for fortyeight hours or more.

29. It is my belief that at the.time ofthis demand, Nick's "sending bank" could stillhave performed a reverse-wire.

30. Nick apologized and conceded his mistake. Nick represented to me that he wentto the bank and requested a reverse-wire, but they refused.

31. I advised Nick to take his customer to the bank with him to demand the reversewire again, but he refused saying that he didn't want to "lose face" in front of oneof his biggest clients. Hie also told me Vannipa assured him she will return themoney. I told him how can you believe her after she lied to you.

32. I was very angry and started fighting with Nick, and got my legal advisor, GaryWilliams on the phone, and he started yelling at nick, and told him to get his acttogether. Nick was calm and told Gary he would sign an IOU note until Vannipareturned the money to him.

33. Nick stated that he would take responsibility for any harm that came from hismistake.

34. Per the request ofWorld Wide Automotive's attorney, Nick requested I submit aninvoice for payment. Said invoice was submitted on September 1, 2012.

35. It is my understanding that the x5m was sold for approximately $200,000.00 andthe x6 sold for approximately $250,000.00 in China.

Vannipa Retains Possession of the Transferred Funds:36. I also called V annipa who promised to drive to Pennsylvania and tender my

payment.37. When Vannipa didn't do as promised I continued to call, email and text her,

demanding my money and calling her a thief. Shortly thereafter, she stopped



33/41

answering her phone. I was also frustrated because she was holding my passporthostage, knowing I needed to travel for business and she threatened me to destroyit if I continued to demand my money. I called the cops, Trooper Enedy from theAvondale state police and reported all this, and they said it was a civil matter. Iwas shocked they did nothing about this matter.

38. On or around this time I learned of a second fraud incident, wherein Vannipa usedmy cashier's check to pYrchase an x5 BMW. Claims surrounding this incidentare being litigated contemporaneous with this case.

39. On October 22, 2012, I drove to Vannipa's restaurant and demanded she returnmy money. At that time she claimed she was in Thailand, and Evelyn wanted toshow me she is a liar and a fraud, so she called me while she was at herrestaurant, and I showed up and she was shocked. I asked her how can she besuch a liar and a fraud, and continue to lie like that. In response to my questionand demand for the return ofmy money, she conceded that she owed me themoney and signed a confession and promise of repayment to such effect.(October 22, 2010).

40. Vannipa wrote this confession and guarantee in front of wo witnesses, EvelynDrovot and Ms. Andujar-Rivera.

41. Per the request ofNick/Steven/World Wide Automotive's attorney, I sent aninvoice to Nick on September 1, 2012, requesting payment immediately.

42. On a date prior to the filing of said Complaint, Nick promised to me that he andhis company would pay me the money owed ifVannipa had not remitted saidpayment by December, 2012. Said promise was made in the presence ofGaryWilliams.

43. As of today 's date, I have not received payment from any of he defendantscaptioned in my Complaint.



34/41

Deponent states that the above statements are true. I am aware that if any of theforegoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.

Sworn & Subscribed before me on thisMay, 2013.I) dayof

G J s m c = ; \ ~Notary PublicNOTARIAL SEALTINA J MAGANANotary PublicNEW G A ~ D E N TWP, CHESTER CNTYMy Commission Expires May 23, 2013

L.S.



35/41

EXHIBITD



36/41

--- - ---6W350 94TH StreetBurridge, IL 60527Tel: [email protected] UP

STOCK# YEAR MAKE1234s678g10- Broken- Bent- Chlooed

D - DentedE - DefectiveF - Scuffed

G- GougedH - StainedJ - cut

ST:

MODEL

K- CrackedL- LooseM - Mlsslno

ELIVERYName:Address:City:Phone:

VIN

N - Painted over R - PuncturedP - Paint defect S - Scratchedo - Hall damaoe T - Torn

W-WavyX - PresentZ - Other

ST:

PRICE

$TOTAL

Terms: Net c.o.o

Receiving agent musthaw driver sign here 8Cknowllg/l(Jdamage* NOTE .. No claims wm be honored unless noted on this Bm of Lading at t ime of deliveryPRINTED NAME AND SIGNAT~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Printed Name MUST ACCOMPANY DEL.WE

; . ' ! ; _ ~ ' ) ; , ~ , " ' - . \

ShiPRer's agent at pick up Pick up date Shipper's agent at delivery Delivery date



37/41

-- - .. -

- - ~ - - --- ca ..., . - : : : : 9 . . . C " " " ' ~ . . . . c 1 t ~11 J JAQUES AVE, RABWAY NJ 07063Phone: (201-456 3654) Fi:i: (731-499 9051)e-mail: [email protected]

SILL OF LADING- - - - ..- . .ORIGIN OEST1NAT10N

X,,-' > '(EAR:

~ ~

v ~ 0 ' : ) / (Y /


38/41

EXHIBIT E



39/41

886 SHARPLESS RD.Hockessin, OE 19707Phone 484-880-3683

TO:Nick WangLW WIRELESS INC.132-53 34t11 ave.Flushing, NY 11354347-831-6066

SHIP TO:Same

COMMENTS OR SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: N c \;( I v a s ~"\J'\,)O \ (Q_ -\\ S1\V .SALESPERSON P.O. NUMBER REQUISITIONER SHIPPED VIA F.O.B. POINT

Joe Riad Newark,NJ

QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE1 BMW XS VIN# 5UXZV4CSXDOB06986 664451 BMW X6 VIN# SUXFG2C51DL783728 72748

SUBTOTALSALES TAX

SHIPPING & HANDUNGTOTAL DUE

Make all checks payable to Riad Holdings .If you have any questions concerning this invoice, contact Joe RiadThank you for your business!

INVOICE #003DATE: 09/01/2012

TERMSPass Due

TOTAL6644572748

13919300

139193



40/41

EXHIBIT F



41/41

10- z _- '2 0 \'L_Li. UL- V\C S-5 3O -339- ollf-?%

18- 2.--=1 - I ~ S f;

-;- l-. ~ w e e . h:> re f 9 . . ~u ' " ' &= 5 '0

Documents

Riad v. Lw Wireless, Inc. Et Al 2.13-Cv-02596 Doc 1 Filed 13 May 13