Metallicus Complaint

Case 4:19-cv-02250 Document 1 Filed on 06/21/19 in TXSD Page 1 of 5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
ADAM KLIEBERT, GLORIA BLAKE, §

and GLENN BLAKE, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
vs. § CASE NO. 4:19-cv-02250
§
METALLICUS, INC. a/k/a Metal, §
MARSHALL HAYNER, and §
REMINGTON REYNOLDS, TREVOR §
SHORT, d/b/a PREMIER LIVE, §
§
Defendants. §
DEFENDANT METALLICUS, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, and 1446, Defendant Metallicus, Inc. a/k/a
Metal (“Metallicus”) hereby files this Notice of Removal and removes to this Court an action that
is pending in the 269th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, in Houston, cause number
2019-32946. In support of this Notice of Removal, Metallicus states as follows:
I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
1. On May 13, 2019, Plaintiffs Adam Kliebert, Gloria Blake, and Glenn Blake
(collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed an Original Petition captioned Adam Kliebert, Gloria Blake, &
Glenn Blake vs. Metallicus, Inc. a/k/a Metal, Marshall Hayner, and Remington Reynolds, Trevor
Short, d/b/a Premier Live, in the 269th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, cause
number 2019-32946 (“the State Court Action”).
2. The Original Petition asserted claims for violations of the Texas Securities Act, the
Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, fraud, fraudulent inducement, and negligent
misrepresentation arising out of Plaintiffs’ purported purchase of cryptocurrency from Metallicus.

II. VENUE
3. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 124(b), 1441(a), and 1446(a)
because the 269th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas—where the State Court Action
was filed, and has been pending prior to removal—is a state court within this federal district and
division.
III. BASIS FOR REMOVAL
A. Amount in Controversy
4. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds the minimum required by 28
U.S.C. § 1332(a). On May 13, 2019, Plaintiffs asserted in the Original Petition that Plaintiffs seek
actual damages in excess of $700,000, plus additional amounts in treble damages, exemplary
damages, and attorneys’ fees. See Exhibit A, ¶ 64 (“the Original Petition”).
B. Diversity of Citizenship
5. There is complete diversity of citizenship between the real parties in interest to this
action.
6. Plaintiff Adam Kliebert is a citizen of Texas because he “is a natural person who is
a resident of Harris County, Texas.” See Ex. A, ¶ 1; see also Preston v. Tenet Healthsystem Mem’l
Med. Ctr., 485 F.3d 793, 797–98 (5th Cir. 2007).
7. Plaintiff Gloria Blake is a citizen of Texas because she “is a natural person who is
a resident of Harris County, Texas.” See id.
8. Plaintiff Glenn Blake is a citizen of Texas because he “is a natural person who is a
resident of Harris County, Texas.” See id.
9. Metallicus is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in
California. Therefore, Metallicus is a citizen of California and Delaware. 28 U.S.C. § 1331(c)(1).
2
10. Mr. Hayner is an individual who resides in San Francisco, California, and is a
citizen of California.
11. Defendant Remington Reynolds is an individual who resides in the State of
Georgia, and is a citizen of Georgia.
12. Defendant Trevor Short is an individual who resides in the State of Georgia, and is
a citizen of Georgia.
13. Upon information and belief, the Defendant sued under the name “Premier Live”
is Premier Tennis Group, LLC (“Premier”), which is a limited liability company organized under
the laws of the State of Georgia, with its principal place of business in Alpharetta, Georgia, that
uses the trademark and business name “Premier Live.” Upon information and belief, all of the
members of Premier are citizens of Georgia. Therefore, the Defendant sued as “Premier Live” is
a citizen of Georgia.
C. Removal is Timely
14. Removal of this action is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) because it is being filed
within thirty days of Metallicus’s receipt of the Original Petition, through service or otherwise.
The Original Petition and Citation (summons) were first served on Metallicus on May 28, 2019.
Upon information and belief, no other defendant was served with the Original Petition or Citation
before that date.
D. Consent of Other Defendants
15. Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Short, and Premier all consent to the removal of the State Court
Action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2)(A). See Exhibit B (“Consent to Removal”).
16. Mr. Hayner’s consent is not required for removal because he has not been served
in the State Court Action. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2)(A).
3
IV. REQUIRED PROCESS AND PLEADINGS
17. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) and the Local Rules of the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Texas, L.R. 81, Metallicus attaches all of the required documents,
including all the required pleadings in the State Court Action (Exhibit A); all executed process
(Exhibit C); the docket sheet for the State Court Action (Exhibit D); a list of all counsel of record,
as currently known to Metallicus, including address, telephone numbers, and parties represented
(Exhibit E); and an index of matters being filed (Exhibit F).
18. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), a copy of the Notice of Removal and all
attachments shall be promptly served on counsel for Plaintiff and the clerk of the 269th Judicial
District Court of Harris County, Texas.
19. By filing this Notice of Removal, Metallicus does not waive any defense that may
be available to it, and Metallicus further reserves all such defenses. If any question arises as to the
propriety of the removal of the State Court Action to this Court, Metallicus seeks to present both
a brief and oral argument in support of its position that this case has been properly removed.
V. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, and 1446, Metallicus hereby removes this
action from the 269th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas to the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston, Division. Metallicus further requests any
additional relief to which it may be justly entitled.
4
Dated: June 21, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
/s/ Elizabeth M. Chiaviello

Elizabeth M. Chiaviello
Texas Bar No. 24088913
Southern District of Texas No. 3097493
1000 Louisiana Street
Suite 4000
Houston, TX 77002
Tel. +1.713.890.5000
Fax: +1.713.890.5001
Email: elizabeth.chiaviello@morganlewis.com
ATTORNEY-IN-CHARGE FOR
DEFENDANT METALLICUS, INC.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on June 21, 2019 a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument
was filed with the Clerk’s Office using the Court’s CM/ECF system and that a copy of the
foregoing will be served via Federal Express and email on the following counsel of record in the
State Court Action:
Ryan Cook
Email: rcook@sseklaw.com
Samuel B. Edwards
Email: sedwards@sseklaw.com
Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas, LLP
1010 Lamar, Suite 900
Houston, Texas 77002
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
/s/ Elizabeth M. Chiaviello

5
Case 4:19-cv-02250 Document 1-1 Filed on 06/21/19 in TXSD Page 1 of 15
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT A
5/13/2019 10:18
5/13/2019 10 18 AM
AM
Marilyn Burgess
Marilyn Burgess - District
District Clerk Harris
Harris County
County
Envelope No.
Envelope No. 33504124
33504124
2019-32946/ / Court: 269
2019-32946 Filed 5/13/2019
Filed:
Nelson Cuero
By: Nelson
5/13/2019 10:18
10:18 AM
AM
CAllSE NO.
CAUSE NO. ------
ADAM KLIEBERT,
ADAM KLIEBERT, GLORIA
GLORIA BLAKE,
BLAKE, & GLENN
GLENN §
BLAh.."E,
BLAKE, § THE DISTRICT
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
COllRT OF
OF
§
Plaintiffs,
Plaintiffs, §
§
vs.
vs. §
§
METALLlCUS, INC.
METALLICUS, INC. a/k/a
a/k1a Metal,
Metal, MARSHALL
MARSHALL § HARRIS COUNTY,
HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
TEXAS
HAYNER and
HAYNER and REMINGTON
REMINGTON REYNOLDS,
REYNOLDS, §
TREVOR SHORT,
TREVOR SHORT, d/b/a
d/b/a PREMIER
PREMIER LIVE
LIVE §
§
Defendants.
Defendants. §
§
§ .JUDICIAL DISTRICT
JUDICIAL DISTRICT
PLAINTIFFS'
PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION
ORIGINAL PETITION
TO THE
TO THE HONORABLE
HONORABLE JUDGE
JUDGE OF
OF SAID
SAm COURT:
COURT
COMES NOW,
COMES NOW, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs Adam
Adam Kliebert,
Kliebert, Gloria
Gloria Blake,
Blake, and
and Glenn
Glenn Blake,
Blake, and
and for their
their
Original Petition
Original Petition complaining
complaining of
of the
the acts
acts of Defendants
Defendants Metallicus,
Metallicus, Inc
Inc, Remington
Remington Reynolds,
Reynolds,
Trevor Short,
Trevor Short, and
and Premier
Premier Live
Live ("Defendants")
("Defendants") would
would show
show the Court
Court and Jury
Jury as follows
follows:
I.
PARTIES
PARTIES AND SERVICE
SERVICE
I.
1. Plaintiffs are
Plaintiffs are individual
individual who
who currently
currently and
and at all relevant
relevant times
times resided
resided in Harris
Harris County,
County,
Texas.
Texas.
2. Defendant Metallicus,
Defendant Metallicus, Inc.
Inc. ("Metallicus")
("Metallicus") is a California
California Corporation.
Corporation. It also
also uses
uses aa trade
trade
00 name of
name of "Metal."
"Meta I." It may
may be served
served by serving
serving its registered
registered agent
agent Lori Wolf
Wolfatat 830
830 Menlo
Menlo Avenue,
Avenue,
"n
00
('I
Ir,
Suite 100,
Suite 100, Menlo
Menlo Park,
Park, CA 94025,
94025
00
iu ..,
_o 3.
J. Defendant Marshall
Defendant Marshall Hayner
Hayner is an individual
individual who,
who, upon
upon information
information and belief,
belief: currently
currently
E
-
::J
Z
C
resides in or around
resides around San Francisco,
Francisco, California.
California He
He may
may be served
served wherever
wherever he may
may be found.
found
<l.I
E
::J
U
o
o
-0
<l.I
t;:
t
<l.I
U
4.
4, Defendant Remington
Defendant Remington Reynolds
Reynolds ("Reynolds")
("Reynolds") is an individual
individual who,
who, upon
upon information
information and
and
belief, currently
belief, currently resides
resides in or around
around Atlanta,
Atlanta, Georgia.
Georgia He
He may
may be served
served wherever
wherever he may
may be
found.
found.
5. Defendant Trevor
Defendant Trevor Short
Short ("Short")
("Shol1") is an individual
individual who,
who, upon
upon information
information and
and belief,
belief,
currently resides
currently resides in or around
around Atlanta,
Atlanta, Georgia.
Georgia. He
He may
may be
be served
served wherever
wherever he may
may be
be found.
found
6. Defendant Premier
Defendant Premier Live
Live is a business
business name
name used
used by
by Reynolds
Reynolds and
and Short.
Short. Upon
Upon information
information
and belief,
and belie( it is not
not a registered
registered legal
legal entity.
entity.
H.
II.
DISCOVERY
DISCOVERY LEVEL
LEVEL
7. Plaintiff intends
Plaintiff intends that
that discovery
discovery be
be conducted
conducted under
under Level
Level 2 of
of the
the Texas
Texas Rules
Rules of
of Civil
Civil
Procedure §~ 190.4.
Procedure 190.4.
III.
JURISDICTION
JURISDICTION AND
AND VENUE
VENUE
8. This Court
This Court has
has subject
subject matter
matter jurisdiction over this
jurisdiction over this case
case under
under Article
Article V, Section
Section 8 of the
the
Texas Constitution
Texas Constitution and
and Sections
Sections 24.007
24.007 and
and 24.008
24.008 of
of the
the Texas
Texas Government
Government Code.
Code.
9. This Court
This has personal
COUl1 has personal jurisdiction over Defendants
jurisdiction over Defendants because
because they
they do
do business
business in the
the State
State
of Texas,
of Texas, and
and because
because all or a substantial
substantial portion
portion of
of the
the events
events giving
giving rise
rise to this
this case
case occurred
occurred in
Texas.
Texas.
o 10
l0. Venue is proper
Venue proper because
because all or a substantial
substantial part
part of
of the
the events
events or omissions
omissions giving
giving rise
rise to
this claim
this claim occurred
occurred in this
this district.
district
00
07
)
00
rd
('I
'n
00
-
z
c
v
E
u
o 2
o
CZ
-0
~
E
v
LJ
III.
STATEMENT
ST ATEMENT OF FACTS
FACTS
1I 1.
I. Plaintiff Adam
Plaintiff Adam Kliebert
Kliebet1 attended
attended the Neckar
Neckar Cup
Cup in November
November or December
December 2017. The
2017. The
Neckar Cup
Neckar Cup is a prestigious
prestigious tennis
tennis tournament
tournament held
held every
every year
year on Neckar
Neckar Island.
Island.
12.
12. The Neckar
The Neckar Cup
Cup is promoted
promoted and run by "Premier
"Premier Live."'
Live. '-I
13.
13. Metallicus is a cryptocurrency
Metallicus cryptocurrency company
company which
which created
created the
the cryptocurrency
cryptocurrency "Metal."
"Metal"
Metallicus also
Metallicus also refers
refers to itself
itself to the investing
investing public
public merely
merely as "Metal,"
"Metal," using
using the
the same
same trade
trade name
name
the currency
as the currency it created
created to further
further conjoin
conjoin itself
itself and
and its currency
currency in the
the minds
minds of the investing
investing
public2
public.2
14.
14. Metallicus is and
Metallicus and has
has been
been a sponsor
sponsor of
of the
the Neckar
Neckar Cup.
Cup Upon
Upon information
information and belief,
belief,
Metallicus agreed
Metallicus agreed to pay to Reynolds
Reynolds and
and Short,
Short, by way
way of
of "Premier
"Premier Live,"
Live," a percentage-based
percentage-based
commission for
commission for any and
and all Metal
Metal sold
sold to investors
investors because
because of the
the Neckar
Neckar Cup.
Cup.
15.
15. result of
As a result of this
this arrangement,
arrangement, Premier
Premier Live
Live heavily
heavily promoted
promoted Metal
Metal during
during the
the 2017
2017
Neckar Cup.
Neckar Cup.
16.
16. Spokesmen on behalf
Spokesmen behalf of Metal
Metal and
and Premier
Premier Live
Live made
made numerous
numerous representations
representations about
about
Metal and
Metal and Metallicus.
Metallicus. According
According to these
these presentations,
presentations, Metal
Metal was
was going
going to have
have a competitive
competitive
advantage over
advantage over other
other cryptocurrencies
cryptocurrencies available
available to investors
investors in the form
form of
of a phone
phone application
application
which was
which was already
already in development
development by Metallicus
Metallicus and
and which
which would
would be exclusive
exclusive to Metal.
Metal.
(')
Certified Document Number: 85218158 - Page 3 of
17.
17. This app
This app supposedly
supposedly would
would give
give its users
users the
the ability
ability to make
make purchases
purchases at stores
stores with Metal
Metal
the currency
as the currency being
being used,
used, instead
instead of United
United States
States Dollars
Dollars or other
other state
state sponsored
sponsored currency,
currency,
00
on
00
Upon information
I Upon information and and belief.
belief. Premier
Premier Live
Li\'e is merely
merely a trade
trade name
name used
used by
bv Remington
Remington Reynolds.
Reynolds. who claims to be
\I 110 claims
'-
Q) the CEO andand Founder.
FOllnder. and
and Trevor
Tre\ or Short.
Shol1. who
who claims
claims to be be the
the President
President and Founder.
Founder. Although
Allhough Premier
Premier Live
Li\ e has a
..0
E website that
wcbsite that indicates
indicates it is based
based out of of Atlanta.
Atlanta, Georgia,
Georgia_ Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs have
have found
found no record
record that
that it is an entity
entity properly
properh
::::l
;z: registered with
registered \I ith the state
state of
of Georgia,
Georgia, or or any
an~' other
olher state.
stale.
cv For the sake
! For sake of of clarity,
c1mity, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs refer
refer to the
the entity
entily exelusi\'ely
e.\clusi\elv as "Metkillicus-.
"Mel<lllicus", and
and the underlying
underlying cry cryplocurrency
ptocurrency
E "Metal" for
as "Metal" for the
the remainder
remainder of of this
this Petition.
Pelition.
::::l
U
o .,
o 3.)
-0
v
t.:::
'E
v
l.J
among other
among other uses.
uses. Moreover,
Moreover, this
this app
app was
was purported
purported to be
be almost
almost ready
ready for
for deployment,
deployment, set for
for
launch in February
launch February 2018.
2018.
18. According to
According to the
the speakers,
speakers, when
when the
the application
application went
went live,
live, the
the price
price of
of Metal
Metal on the
the
marketplaces would
marketplaces would spike
spike as demand
demand for
for the
the cryptocurrency
cryptocurrency that
that was
was the
the easiest
easiest to use
use in everyday
everyday
life rose.
life rose. They
They presented
presented projections
projections of
of the
the price
price reaching
reaching $45
$45 per
per coin
coin or higher.
higher.
I C)
19. Relying on these
Relying these representations,
representations, Mr.
Mr. Kliebert
Kliebert began
began purchasing
purchasing Metal
Metal directly
directly from
from
Metallicus, ultimately
Metallicus, ultimately investing
investing hundreds
hundreds of
of thousands
thousands of
of dollars.
dollars
20.
20. Mr. Kliebert
Mr. Kliebert had
had multiple
multiple conversations
conversations over
over the
the following
following months
months with
with Mr.
Mr. Hayner
Hayner
personally, the
personally, the CEO
CEO of
of Metallicus.
Metallicus. Hayner
Hayner repeated
repeated and
and reiterated
reiterated the
the representations
about the
the
Metallicus app
Metallicus app and
and the
the price
price forecasts.
forecasts
21. Continuing to believe

Continuing believe these
these representations,
representations, Mr.
Mr. Kliebert
Kliebert introduced
introduced Hayner
Hayner to Gloria
Gloria
Blake, his
Blake, his mother,
mother, and
and Glenn
Glenn Blake,
Blake, his
his step-father.
step-father Hayner
Hayner repeated
repeated these
these representations
about
the Metallicus
the Metallicus app,
app, and
and ultimately
ultimately Mr.
Mr. and
and Mrs.
Mrs. Blake
Blake were
were convinced
convinced to invest
invest their
their money
money as
well
well.
22. Metal holdings

All Metal holdings sold
sold by
by Defendants
Defendants to the
the Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs were
were made
made by
by Metallicus
Metallicus on their
their
behalf Upon
behalf. Upon information
information and
and belief,
belief, the
the Metal
Metal they
they were
were being
being sold
sold was
was coming
coming directly
directly from
from
Metallicus Plaintiffs
Metallicus. Plaintiffs later
later discovered
discovered that
that during
during this
this period
period of
of time,
time, Rayner
Hayner and other
other Metallicus
Metalliclls
insiders were
insiders were selling
selling out
out their
their own
own personal
personal holdings
holdings of
of Metal.
Metal. As
As such,
such, Plaintiffs
Plaintitfs have
have reason
reason to
Certified Document Number: 85218158 - Page 4 of 1
believe that
believe that Metallicus
Metallicus was
was attempting
attempting to
to artificially
artificially inflate
intlate the
the value
value of
of Metallicus
Metallicus to
to offload
offload the
the
insiders' holdings
insiders' holdings onto
onto public
public investors
investors like
like the
the Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs.
00 23. Ultimately, contrary

Ultimately, contrary to
to the
the repeated
repeated representations
representations of the
the Defendants,
Defendants, the
the Metallicus
Metallicus app
app
C'I
In
00
was not
was not released
released until
until September
September 2018.
2018. Moreover,
Moreover, the
the application
application that
that was
was released
released bore
bore little
little
resemblance to the
resemblance the promised
promised features
features that
that the
the Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs were
were told
told were
were included
included or would
would be
C
:u
~
::l
U
o 4
o
v
,~
E
:u
u
included.
included.
24. Unsurprisingly, the

Unsurprisingly, the substantial
substantial delay
delay in publication
publication of the application,
application, combined
combined with
with the
limited features
limited features it provided,
provided, did
did nothing
nothing to increase
increase the
the price
price of Metal.
Metal Quite
Quite the
the contrary,
contrary, Metal
Metal
value has
value has cratered,
cratered, resulting
resulting in almost
almost complete
complete losses
losses of the
the Plaintiffs'
Plaintiffs' investments.
investments.
IV.
IV.
CAUSES OF ACTION
CAUSES ACTION
First Claim
First Claim for
for Relief
Relief
Violation of
Violation o(tlte Te.x;asSecurities
the Texas Act
Securities Act
(Against all Defendants)
(Against Defendants)
25. Plaintiffs repeat

Plaintiffs repeat and
and re-allege
re-allege all previous
previous paragraphs
paragraphs of
of this
this Petition
Petition as if
iffully f0l1h
fully set forth
herein.
herein.
26. The investments

The investments made
made by Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs qualify
qualify as securities
securities under
under TEX
TEX CIV.
CIV. CODE
CODE ANN,
ANN. §~
581-4(A).
581-4(A).
27. Defendants offered

Defendants offered and
and sold
sold securities
securities to residents
residents of the
the state
state of Texas,
Texas, and
and are
are therefore
therefore
subject to the
subject the Texas
Texas Securities
Securities Act,
Act, TEX
TEX CIV.
CIV. CODE
CODE ANN.
ANN. §~ 581,
581, ei
e{ seq.
W(/
28. Defendants and/or

Defendants and/or their
their agents
agents violated
violated §581-33(A)(2)
~581-33(A)(2) of the
the Texas
Texas Securities
Securities Act in that
that
they offered
they offered and
and sold
sold a security
security by means
means of untrue
untrue statements
statements of material
material fact
fact and/or
and/or by the
the
omission to state
omission state material
material facts
facts necessary
necessary in order
order to make
make the
the statements
statements made,
made, in light
light of the
circumstances under
circumstances under which
which they
they were
were made,
made, not misleading
misleading and
and Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs were
were damaged
damaged thereby.
thereby
4-
o
'·n
<lJ
bfJ
29. Additionally, and
Additionally, and in the
the alternative,
alternative, all Defendants
Defendants offered
otTered and
and sold
sold securities
securities within
within the
the
0... '"
00 state of
state of Texas
Texas which
which were
were not registered
registered as securities
securities in Texas,
Texas, and which
which were
were not exempt
exempt from
from
'n
00
('I the requirement

the requirement to
to register
register prior
prior to sale
sale within
within the
the state
state of Texas.
Texas. See
5;ee TEX
TEX CIV.
crV. CODE
CODE ANN.
ANN §~
'n
00
~ 581-6
581-6.
..D
~
C
:::l
Z
the alternative,
alternative, Defendants
Defendants offered
otlered and
and sold
sold securities
securities within
within the
the state
state
5
Texas when
of Texas when they
they were
were required
required to be registered,
registered, and
and they
they were
were not,
not. See TEX CIV.
See TEX CODE ANN.
eIV CODE ANN.
§~ 581-12.
581-12.
31..
31 Additionally, and
the alternative,
Defendants violated
violated §581-33(F)(2)
~581-33(F)(2) of the Texas
Texas
Securities Act in that

Securities that they
they materially
materially aided
aided the
the sellers
sellers of the
the securities
securities at issue
issue through
through an intent
intent to
deceive or defraud
deceive defraud or with
with reckless
reckless disregard
disregard for
for the
the truth
truth or the law
law when
when offering
offering and
and describing
describing
the securities
the securities at issue
issue to Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs Defendants
Defendants rendered
rendered assistance
assistance in the
the face
face of
ofaa perceived
perceived risk
that his
that his or its assistance
assistance would
would facilitate
facilitate untruthful
untruthful or unlawful
unlawful activity
activity by the primary
primary violator(s)
violator(s)
and each
and each possessed
possessed a general
general awareness
awareness that
that his
his or its role
role was
was part
part of an overall
overall activity
activity that
that was
was
1111 proper.
improper.

the alternative,
Defendants Reynolds
Reynolds and
and Short,
Short, by virtue
virtue of their
their
position and
position and relationships,
relationships, were
were control
control persons
persons of Premier
Premier Live
Live within
within the
the meaning
meaning of
or §581-
~581-
33(F)(I) of
33(F)(1) of the
the Texas
Texas Securities
Securities Act
Act as they
they had
had the
the power
power and
and influence
intluence to control
control the
the acts
acts of
Premier Live
Premier Live and
and exercised
exercised the
the same
same power
power and
and influence.
influence. consequence, Defendants
As a consequence, Defendants
Reynolds and
Reynolds and Short
Short are
are jointly and severally
jointly and severally liable
liable for any
any violations
violations of §581-33(A)(2)
~581-33(A)(2) ofPremier
of Premier
Live.
Live.

the alternative,
alternative, Defendant
Defendant Hayner,
Hayner, by virtue
virtue of
of his
his position
position and
and
relationship, was
relationship, was a control
control persons
persons of
of Metallicus
Metallic us within
within the
the meaning
meaning of §581-33(F)(1)
~581-33(F)( I) of the
the Texas
Texas
Securities Act as he had

Securities had the power
power and
and influence
intluence to control
control the
the acts
acts of Metallicus
Metalliclls and
and exercised
exercised
0 the same
the same power
power and
and influence.
influence As a consequence,
consequence, Defendant
Defendant Hayner
Hayner is
isjointly severally liable
jointly and severally liable
cs
a. for any
for any violations
violations of §581-33(A)(2)
~581-33(A)(2) of Metallicus.
Metallicus.
00
co
'r,
Co
00 34. result of these
As a result these violations,
violations, and
and pursuant
pursuant to §581-33(D)(1)
~581-33(D)( 1) of the
the Texas
Texas Securities
Securities Act,
r("'II
'n
.rs
CO
00
::...• Plaintiffs are
Plaintiffs are entitled
entitled to have
have the
the above
above described
described transactions
transactions rescinded,
rescinded, and,
and, upon
upon tender
tender of the
the
<lJ
.D
securities, to recover
securities, recover from
from the
the Defendants:
Defendants (a)
(a) the
the consideration
consideration paid
paid for
for the
the securities
securities plus
plus interest
interest
z
z
Certified Doeumen
6
thereon at the legal

thereon legal rate
rate from
from the
the date
date of purchase
purchase by
by the
the Plaintiff,
Plaintitf, or actual
actual damages
damages (b)
(b) plus
plus costs
costs
and attorney's
and attorney's fees.
fees
Second Claim
Second Claim for Relief
Relief
Violation of
violation (?fthe Te.x:a.1i Deceptive
the Texas Deceptive Trade
Trade Practices
Practices Act
Act

and reallege
reallege all previous
previous paragraphs
paragraphs of this
this Petition
Petition as if fully
fully set forth
forth
herein.
herein.
36. Defendants engaged

Defendants engaged in certain
certain false,
false, misleading
misleading and
and deceptive
deceptive acts,
acts, practices
practices and/or
and/or
omissions actionable
omissions actionable under
under the
the Texas
Texas Deceptive
Deceptive Trade
Trade Practices
Practices - Consumer
Consumer Protection
Protection Act (Texas
(Texas
Business and
Business and Commerce
Commerce Code,
Code, Chapter
Chapter 17.41,
17.41, et seq.).
seq.).
37. Plaintiffs are

Plaintiffs are "consumers"
"consumers" as defined
defined by
by the DTPA.
DTPA.
38.
38. Defendants engaged
Defendants engaged in an "unconscionable
"unconscionable action
action or course
course of action"
action" to the
the detriment
detriment of
Plaintiffs as that
Plaintiffs that term
term is defined
defined by
by Section
Section 17.45(5)
17.45(5) of
of the
the Texas
Texas Business
Business and Commerce
Commerce Code,
Code,
taking advantage
by taking advantage of
of the
the lack of
of knowledge,
knowledge, ability,
ability, experience,
experience, or capacity
capacity of Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs to a
grossly unfair
grossly unfair degree.
degree.
39. Defendants made

Defendants made unlawful,
unlawful, deceptive
deceptive statements
statements and promises
promises to Plaintiffs,
Plaintitfs, express
express and
and
implied. These
implied. These statements
statements are
are deemed
deemed deceptive
deceptive under
under TEX BUS.
Bus. & COM.
COM ANN.
ANN §~ 1746(b)(5),
7.46(b)(5), (7),
and (24).
(12), and
(8), (9), (12), (24)
(') 40
40. direct and
As a direct and proximate
proximate result
result of the
the Defendants'
Defendants' violation
violation of
of the Texas
Texas Insurance
Insurance Code,
Code,
Plaintiffs suffered
Plaintiffs suffered financial
financial damage.
damage.
41. Plaintiffs are

Plaintiffs are entitled
entitled to economic
economic damages,
damages, costs,
costs, attorney's
attorney's fees,
fees, additional
additional damages
damages up
lip
00
on
00
three times
to three times actual
actual damages,
damages, and
and any
any other
other relief
relief this
this Court
Court determines
determines is proper.
proper.
01
<n
00
Second Claim
Second Claim for Relief
Relief
Fraud
Fraud
t::
Q.)
E
:::
u
o 7
o
-0
V
>..:::;
°eQ.)
lJ
42.
and re-allege
previous paragraphs
paragraphs of this
this Petition
fully set forth
forth
herein
herein.
43. alleged with

As alleged with specificity
specificity in this
this Petition,
Petition, Defendants
Defendants knowingly
knowingly made
made false
false statements
statements
fact to
of fact to the
the Plaintiffs,
Plaintiffs, and/or
andlor omitted
omitted or concealed
concealed true
true statements
statements of fact
fact from
from the Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs.
Defendants' false
Defendants' false and
and incomplete
incomplete statements
statements created
created an untrue
untrue and
and misleading
misleading impression
impression in the
the
minds of
minds of Plaintiffs.
PlaintitTs. With
With respect
respect to
to each
each such
such true
true statement
statement alleged
alleged to have
have been
been omitted
omitted or
concealed by
concealed by the
the Defendants,
Defendants, the
the Defendants
Defendants owed
owed the
the Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs a duty
duty to disclose
disclose the truth
truth of
such omitted
such omitted or concealed
concealed fact.
fact These
These facts
facts were
were material
material in Plaintiffs'
Plaintiffs' decisions
decisions to invest
invest with
with
Defendants and
Defendants and to maintain
maintain the
the investment
investment with
with Defendants
Defendants because
because a reasonable
reasonable person
person under
under the
the
circumstances would
circumstances would regard
regard the
the facts
facts misrepresented
misrepresented and
and otherwise
otherwise omitted
omitted as important
important in
deciding to enter
deciding enter into
into the
the transaction.
transaction. Defendants knew
Defendants knew that
that Plaintiffs
Plaintitfs would
would find
tind the
misrepresented and
misrepresented and omitted
omitted facts
facts to be
be important
imp0l1ant in deciding
deciding how
how to proceed.
proceed.
44. The statements

The statements and
and omissions
omissions of
of the
the Defendants
Defendants as alleged
alleged herein
herein were
were untrue.
untrue.
45
45. Defendants knew
Defendants knew or should
should have
have known
known at the
the time
time they
they made
made the representations
representations and
and
omissions that
omissions that their
their affirmative
aftirmative statements
statements as alleged
alleged herein
herein were
were false
false and/or
and/or that
that their
their omissions
omissions
concealments were
or concealments were deceptive
deceptive by
by virtue
vil1ue of being
being incomplete.
incomplete.
46. The Defendants

The Defendants made
made the
the false
false statements,
statements, and
and engaged
engaged in the
the omissions
omissions and
and
concealments, with
concealments, with the
the intent
intent to defraud
defraud the
the Plaintiff
Plaintiff and
and in order
order to induce
induce the
the Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs to rely
rely
'-
::l
00
<lJ
00
the statements,
on the statements, omissions
omissions and
and concealments.
concealments.
OJ
0-
47. Plaintiffs believed

Plaintiffs believed the
the false
false statements
statements made
made to them,
them, or believed
believed that
that no facts existed
110 facts existed
inconsistent with
inconsistent with Defendants'
Defendants' omissions
omissions and
and concealments,
concealments, and
and reasonably
reasonably acted
acted in reliance
reliance upon
upon
those beliefs
those beliefs to their
their detriment.
detriment.
E
:::l
;z:
48.
48. result of their
As a result their detrimental
detrimental reliance
reliance on Defendants'
Defendants' fraudulent
fraudulent statements
statements and
and
8
omissions, Plaintiffs
omissions, Plaintiffs have
have suffered
suffered damages
damages and
and are
are also
also entitled
entitled to rescission
rescission of the transactions.
transactions
Third Claim
Third Claim for Relief
Relief
Frlllululent Inducement
Fraudulent Inducement
(Against All Defendants)

and re-allege
previous paragraphs
paragraphs of this
this Petition
fully set forth
forth
herein.
herein.
50. described herein,

As described herein, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs were
were fraudulently
fraudulently induced
induced to invest
invest with
with Defendants.
Defendants These
These
Defendants made
Defendants made numerous
numerous false
false representations
about the
the investment,
investment, including,
including, but not limited
limited
to, the
the likelihood
likelihood of positive
positive returns,
returns, the
the current
current status
status of
of the
the work,
work, and the
the timeframe
timeframe in which
which
work was
work was anticipated
anticipated to be concluded,
concluded, among
among other
other things.
things Defendants
Defendants also
also failed
failed to disclose
disclose the
fact that
fact that the
the insiders
insiders were
were offloading
oftloading their
their own
own holdings
holdings at or around
around the same
same period
period of
of time
time and
Plaintiffs were
that Plaintiffs were likely
likely purchasing
purchasing those
those off-loaded
off-loaded holdings.
holdings. These
These claims
claims and
and omissions
omissions were
were
false and/or
false and/or misleading
misleading and
and the
the Defendants
Defendants knew
knew they
they were
were false
false and/or
and/or misleading
misleading and,
and, at a
minimum, acted
minimum, acted with
with reckless
reckless disregard
disregard for
for their
their falsity
falsity and
and untruthfulness.
untruthfulness.
51..
51 Had Plaintiffs
Had Plaintiffs been
been made
made aware
aware of
of the
the true
true facts,
facts, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs would
would never
never have
have agreed
agreed to
invest.
invest.
52. As a result
As result of
of these
these fraudulent
fraudulent inducements,
inducements, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs have
have suffered
suffered damages
damages and
and are
are also
also
entitled to rescission
entitled rescission of
of the
the transactions.
transactions.
Fourth Claim
Fourth Claim for Relief
Relief
Negligent Misrepresentation
Negligent Misrepresentation

and re-allege
previous paragraphs
paragraphs of this
this Petition
fully set forth
forth
00
'n
00
herein.
herein.
rl
'r,
00
54.
54. described in this
As described this Petition,
Petition, Defendants
Defendants made
made numerous
numerous representations
representations to Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs about
about
'-
<lJ
..D
E
::l the nature
the nature and
and risks
risks of
of the investment
investment contemplated
contemplated by Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs. Defendants
Defendants all had a pecuniary
pecuniary
Z
9
interest in the
interest the transactions
transactions being
being completed.
completed
5)
55. Defendants provided
Defendants provided information
information to Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs about
about the
the transaction
transaction which
which were
were false
false and
and
misleading, and
or misleading, and Defendants
Defendants supplied
supplied that
that information
information for
for the
the guidance
guidance of Plaintiffs.
PlaintitTs
56. Defendants did

Defendants did not exercise
exercise reasonable
reasonable care
care in obtaining
obtaining and/or
and/or communicating
communicating the
the correct
correct
information to Plaintiffs.
information Plaintiffs
)7.
57. Plaintiffs justifiably
Plaintiffs relied upon
justifiably relied upon the
the representations
representations and/or
and/or omissions
omissions of material
material
information from
information from Defendants.
Defendants
58. As a direct
direct and
and proximate
proximate result
result of these
these negligent
negligent misrepresentations
misrepresentations and omissions,
omissions,
Plaintiffs invested
Plaintiffs invested hundreds
hundreds of thousands
thousands of dollars,
dollars, and
and later
later refrained
refrained from withdrawing
withdrawing these
these
investments, when
investments, when Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs would
would not have
have so agreed
agreed had
had the representations
representations not been
been made
made
and/or had
and/or had been
been made
made accurately
accurately or had
had material
material information
information not been
been withheld.
withheld. As such,
such, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs
have suffered
have suffered actual,
actual, special,
special, and
and consequential
consequential damages.
damages.
v.
V.
Discovery Rule
Discovery Rule and Fraudulent Concealment
Fraudulent Concealment

and re-allege
previous paragraphs
paragraphs of this
this Petition
fully set forth
forth
herein.
herein.
60. As described
As described above,
above, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs did
did not know
know and
and could
could not have
have known
known that
that the
the Defendants
Defendants
misrepresented the
misrepresented the risks
risks and
and characteristics
characteristics of the
the investments,
investments, or that
that the
the investments
investments being
being
"-o
o offered to them
offered them were
were not registered
registered when
when they
they were
were required
required to be,
be, or that Defendants
Defendants were
were not
<lJ
bl)
:,;
Cl.. registered to sell the
registered the investments
investments as required.
required. Plaintiffs were at the
Plaintiffs were the mercy
mercy of
of Defendants
Defendants to
00
'n
00
accurately inform
accurately inform them
them of the
the risks
risks and
and characteristics
characteristics of the investments
investments as well
well as whether
whether the
the
rl
or,
00
legal requirements
legal requirements for
for sale
sale had
had been
been met,
met, as well
well as the
the factual
factual nature
nature of
of the application
application being
being built
built
..D
~
E
and the
and the timeframe
timeframe in which
which it could
could be completed.
completed. such, the injuries
As such, InJunes are
are inherently
inherently
-
::;
Z
C
<lJ
E
OJ
u
o 10
o
-0
<lJ
''''::
.;:;
~
v
undiscoverable.
undi scoverable.
61.
61. The injury
The injury is also
also objectively
objectively verifiable.
verifiable. The
The books
books and records
records of the
the Defendants
Defendants can and
ancl
will definitively
will definitively show
show the
the occurrence
occurrence of
of the
the misconduct
misconduct and
and the
the date(s)
date(s) it took
took place.
place. There
There are
also financial
also tinancial records
records which
which can definitively
definitively demonstrate
demonstrate the damages
damages which
which resulted
resulted from
Defendants' wrongdoing.
Defendants' wrongdoing.
62
Additionally, and alternatively,
alternatively, Defendants
Defendants fraudulently
fraudulently concealed
concealed the
the wrongdoing
wrongdoing
complained of
complained ofherein alleged above,
herein. As alleged above, Plaintiff
Plaintiff Kliebert
Kliebert spoke
spoke to the Defendants,
Defendants, or their
their agents,
agents,
repeatedly over
repeatedly over the
the months
months following
following the
the investments.
investments. Defendants
Defendants repeatedly
repeatedly assured
assured him that
that the
the
app was
app was almost
almost complete,
complete, that all other
other representations
representations previously
previously made
made were
were still accurate.
accurate.
Defendants further
Defendants further knew
knew that
that Mr.
Me Kliebert
Kliebert shared
shared these
these conversations
conversations with
with the other
other Plaintiffs,
PlaintilTs, and
and
of the
that all of the Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs continued
continued to rely upon
upon these
these ongoing
ongoing statements,
statements.
63. result, the

As a result, the applicable
applicable statutes
statutes of
of limitation
limitation were
were tolled
tolled until at least
least approximately
approximately
September 2018
September 2018 when
when the
the application
application was
was finally
tinally published.
published.
VI.
VI.
DAMAGES
DAMAGES
Economic and
Economic and Actual
Actual Damages
Damages
64. By reason
By reason of
of the
the above
above and foregoing,
foregoing, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs have
have sustained
sustained economic
economic and actual
actual
damages exceeding
damages exceeding $700,000,
$700,000, as will be proven
proven at the
the trial of this
this matter,
matter, including
including all sums
sums lost
as a result
as result of the wrongful
wrongful acts
acts of
of the
the Defendants,
Defendants, statutory
statutory damages,
damages, lost
lost opportunities,
opportunities, interest
interest at
<lJ
Of)
ro
0.. the legal
the legal rate,
rate, and costs
costs of this
this proceeding.
proceeding.
Exemplary Damages
Exemplary Damages
65.
65, Plaintiffs will
Plaintiffs wi II further
further show
show that
that the acts
acts and omissions
omissions of Defendants
Defendants complained
complained of herein
herein
were committed
were committed with
with gross
gross negligence
negligence and/or
and/or knowingly,
knowingly, willfully,
willfully, intentionally,
intentionally, with actual
actual
C
<lJ
E
::::l
U
o 1III
o
-a
<lJ
'';::::
u
E
awareness, and
awareness, and with
with the
the specific
specific and
and predetermined
predetermined intention
intention of enriching
enriching said
said Defendants
Defendants at the
the
expense of Plaintiffs.
expense Plaintiffs In order
order to punish
punish said
said Defendants
Defendants for
for such
such unconscionable
unconscionable acts
acts and
and to deter
deter
such actions
such actions and/or
and/or omissions
omissions in the
the future,
future, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs also
also seek recovery
recovery of exemplary
exemplary damages
damages
from the
from the Defendants
Defendants as provided
provided by Section
Section 41.003(1) Texas Civil
41 003(1) of the Texas Civil Practice
Practice and
and Remedies
Remedies
Code.
Code.
Costs and
Costs and Attorney's
Attorney's Fees
Fees
66. Plaintiffs hereby

Plaintiffs hereby request
request the
the Court
Court award
award Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs all costs
costs and
and reasonable
reasonable and
and necessary
necessary
attorney's fees
attorney's fees incurred
incurred by or on behalf
behalf of
of Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs herein,
herein, including
including all fees
fees necessary
necessary in the
the
event of an appeal
event appeal of
of this
this cause
cause to the
the Court
Court of
of Appeals
Appeals and/or
and/or the
the Supreme
Supreme Court
COUl1of Texas, as the
of Texas.
Court deems
Court deems equitable
equitable and just, pursuant to §~ 581-33D(7)
just, pursuant the Texas
581-330(7) of the Texas Securities
Securities Act.
Act
VII.
VII.
JURY DEMAND
JURY DEMAND
67. Plaintiffs demand

Plaintiffs demand their
their right
right to trial
trial by jury and will tender
jury and tender the appropriate
appropriate fee.
fee
VIII.
VIII.
REQUEST FOR
REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE
DISCLOSURE
68. Pursuant to Texas

Pursuant Texas Rule
Rule of Civil
Civil Procedure
Procedure I94, Plaintiffs make
194, Plaintiffs make this
this Request
Request for
for Disclosure
Disclosure
Defendants, hereby
on Defendants, hereby requesting
requesting Defendants
Defendants to disclose,
disclose, within
within 50 days
days of service
service of this
this request,
request,
information and
the information and material
material described
described in Rule
Rule 194.2 of the
194.2 of the Texas
Texas Rules
Rules of Civil
Civil Procedure.
Procedure.
'--o
rl IX.
OJ
OfJ
ro
Cl... PRAYER
PRAYER
00 WHEREFORE, PREMISES
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED,
CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs pray
pray for
for judgment be entered
judgment to he entered
rl
'n
00
:....
against Defendants,
against Defendants, jointly and severally,
jointly and severally, as follows:
follows
OJ
..D
E
::l Actual, consequential,
a. Actual, consequential, additional,
additional, special
special and
and incidental
incidental damages
damages in an amount
alllount to be
Z
c:
OJ
E
::l
U
o 12
12
o
"0
'.=t
OJ
OJ
U
determined by the
determined the trier
trier of fact;
fact;
Exemplary/additional damages
b. Exemplary/additional damages as permitted
permitted by law;
law;
Reasonable attorneys'
c. Reasonable attorneys' fees;
fees;
Prejudgment and post

d. Prejudgment post-judgment interest provided
judgment interest provided by
by law;
law;
Costs of suit;
e. Costs suit;
f
f. All other relief,
All other relief, in law
law and in equity,
equity, to which
which Plaintiff
Plaintiff may be entitled.
entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
Respectfully submitted,
SHEPHERD, SMITH,
SHEPHERD, SMITH, EDWARDS
EDWARDS & KANTAS,
KANTAS. LLP
sS Ryan ('ook
HV({11 Cook
Ryan Cook
Ryan Cook (TSBN:
(TSBN 24080840) 24080840)
Samuel B. Edwards
Samuel Edwards (TSBN: (TSBN 24031634)
24031634)
1010 Lamar,
1010 Lamar, Suite
Suite 900 900
Houston, Texas
Houston, Texas 77002 77002
!-C l>C!k(a:s~ek
rcookrC ssek 1 ~1\\'. . cum
(.111::
sedw Vas) sse a w . t- orn

~~:_~{t~~Yf:~rf).)_{_f~~~~I_~~~~kJXt\~:;.~;_\-~r).~
Telephone
Telephone: 713.2272400
713.227.2400
Facsimile:
Facsimile: 713.227.7215
713.227.7215
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

ATTORNEYS PLAINTIFFS
r')
"-0
r,)
V
t::n
ro
0...
00
'n
00
('1
<n
00
.D
~
;::::
'3
;z:
a3
E
:::l
U
0
0 13
13
-0
V
'';::
-e
v
U
MARILYN BURGESS
MARILYN BURGESS
HARRIS COUNTY
HARRIS DISTRICT CLERK
COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK
COpy OF
COPY m PLEAUNG PROVIDED BY MD.
PLEADING PROVIDED PLiO.
Process Pick-Up
Civil Process Pick-Up Form
Form
CAUSE NUMBER:
CAUSE NUMBER: )Z1 ')0 lqI - () dJ1c{(0 q)(,,
ATY CIV
CIV COURT-X
COURT
6~ 4th--)
( REQUESTING ATTORNEY/FIRM
REQUESTING ATTORNEY /FIRM NOTIFICATION
NOTIFICA nON
*ATTORNEY:
*ATTORNEY: ,-4 / *PH:76~/JJ<}-t(@
*PH: Y3
"'CIVIL PROCESS
*CIVIL PROCESS SERVER:
SERVER: *BOX__
*BOX
*PH:
*PH:
*PERSON NOTIFIED
*PERSON NOTIFIED SVC
SVC READY:
READY: ~_l{QU6:tC")e_
** NOTIFIED
NOTIFIED BY:
BY: ~
_ _,L_-_-_-_-_-_-_- _
DATE:
Document
Type of Service Document: --'----_,....,.__ Tracking Number 'PI
Number -+-...!_.L--'l'--V----'''----'''---
Document __ -i-J-----=-<=-_
Type of Service Document: Tracking Number
Number : --I-- .-
Document_-------'..L'-"'--A---_
Type of Service Document:
jO~4'V-
Tracking Number
Tracking 75& ~5 JifJ
Document: Tracking Number
Number , .
91
Type of Service Document: Tracking
Document:
Document:
? I) _L
(~ __)~
Number=;Zi~
Tracking Number
Tracking Number
Tracking
:fS"J 7 :1_
:J..CJ-.9
Document:.A-
Type of Service Document: Number7234
Tracking Number-7 p
Type of
Type of Service
Service Document:
Document:______ Tracking Number I __ :_: _
Type of
Type of Service
Service Document:
Document______ Number
Tracking Number _
Document______
Type of Service Document: Number
Tracking Number
Process papers
Process papers prepared
prepared by: l?h()nda Momon
Rhonda M()m()n
Date: ~-
Date: Jfo
- /6 2019
2019 30days
30 waiting ~-_f6__-2019 -2019
days waiting -
'--o "'Process papers

*Process papers released
released to:
to:
V
bfJ
(P~E)
OJ
c...
*(CONT ACT NUMBER)
*(CONTACT NUMBER) (SIGNATURE)
(SIGNATURE)
"'Process papers
*process papers released
released by:
by: Iris Collins
iris Collins
(PRINT NAME)
(PRINT NAME)
C
I Call \
t'\S
CCM. r\S
::l (SIGNATURE)
(SIGNATURE)
Z
Date:
* Date: ZZ ,,2019
2019 Time: :2 AM /PM
AM /PM
RECORDER'S MEMORANDUM
MEMORANDUM
This Instrument is of poor quality
This Instrument quality
at the
et time of imaging.
the time imaging. Revised
Revised 12-15-2014
12-15--2014
EXHIBIT B
CONSENT TO REMOVAL
Please be advised that Defendants Remington Reynolds, Trevor Short, and Premier Live (which
is a business name used by Premier Tennis Group, LLC) hereby consent to the removal of the
action entitled Adam Kliebert, et al. v. Metallicus Inc., No. 2019-32946 (the “Action”) from the
District Court of Harris County, 269th Judicial District, to the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas. These defendants have not made an appearance in the Action and are
not making an appearance by this consent. These defendants reserve all rights and defenses in
connection with the Action, including but not limited to the rights to seek to quash any service of
process and to seek dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction or for any other defect that may
warrant dismissal under applicable law.
Dated: June 20, 2019 COBB MARTINEZ WOODWARD PLLC
By: /s/ Jeffery I. Nicodemus________

Jeffery I. Nicodemus
1700 Pacific Avenue, Suite 3100
Dallas, TX 75201
Tel. +1.214.220.5207
Fax: +1.214.220.5257
Email: jnicodemus@cobbmartinez.com
ATTORNEY-IN-CHARGE FOR
DEFENDANTS REMINGTON REYNOLDS,
TREVOR SHORT, AND PREMIER LIVE
EXHIBIT C
Case 4:19-cv-02250 Document 1-3 Filed on 06/21/19 in TXSD Page
Marilyn Burgess - District11
Clerkof 20County
5/29/2019 5:26 PM
Harris
Envelope No. 33953607
By: PAM ROBICHEAUX
Filed: 5/29/2019 5:26 PM
EXHIBIT D
Office of Harris County District Clerk - Marilyn Burgess Page 1 of 2
HCDistrictclerk.com KLIEBERT, ADAM vs. METALLICUS INC 6/21/2019

Cause: 201932946 CDI: 7 Court: 269
APPEALS
No Appeals found.
COST STATMENTS
No Cost Statments found.
TRANSFERS
No Transfers found.
POST TRIAL WRITS

No Post Trial Writs found.
ABSTRACTS
No Abstracts found.
SETTINGS
No Settings found.
NOTICES
No Notices found.
SUMMARY
CASE DETAILS CURRENT PRESIDING JUDGE
File Date 5/13/2019 Court 269th
Case (Cause) Location Address 201 CAROLINE (Floor: 13)
HOUSTON, TX 77002
Case (Cause) Status Active - Civil
Phone:7133686370
Case (Cause) Type Securities/Stock
JudgeName CORY SEPOLIO
Next/Last Setting Date N/A
Court Type Civil
Jury Fee Paid Date 5/13/2019
ACTIVE PARTIES
Name Type Post Attorney
Jdgm
KLIEBERT, ADAM PLAINTIFF - CIVIL COOK, RYAN
SCOTT
METALLICUS INC DEFENDANT - CIVIL
BLAKE, GLORIA PLAINTIFF - CIVIL COOK, RYAN
SCOTT
BLAKE, GLENN PLAINTIFF - CIVIL COOK, RYAN
SCOTT
HAYNER, MARSHALL DEFENDANT - CIVIL
REYNOLDS, REMINGTON DEFENDANT - CIVIL
SHORT, TREVOR DEFENDANT - CIVIL
METALLICUS INC (CALIFORNIA CORPORATION) REGISTERED AGENT
MAY BE SERVED BY SERVING ITS
https://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/edocs/public/CaseDetailsPrinting.aspx?Get=CiWCQ9GGYJvUp... 6/21/2019
Office of Harris County District Clerk - Marilyn Burgess Page 2 of 2
PREMIER LIVE DEFENDANT - CIVIL
INACTIVE PARTIES
No inactive parties found.
JUDGMENT/EVENTS
Date Description Order Post Pgs Volume Filing Person
Signed Jdgm /Page Attorney Filing
5/13/2019 ORIGINAL PETITION 0 COOK, RYAN SCOTT KLIEBERT, ADAM
5/13/2019 JURY FEE PAID (TRCP 216) 0
5/13/2019 ORIGINAL PETITION 0 COOK, RYAN SCOTT BLAKE, GLENN
5/13/2019 ORIGINAL PETITION 0 COOK, RYAN SCOTT BLAKE, GLORIA
SERVICES
Type Status Instrument Person Requested Issued Served Returned Received Tracking Deliver
To
CITATION SERVICE ISSUED/IN ORIGINAL METALLICUS 5/13/2019 5/16/2019 73625294 ATTORNEY
(NON- POSSESSION OF PETITION INC PICK-UP
RESIDENT SERVING AGENCY (CALIFORNIA
CORPORATE) CORPORATION)
MAY BE
SERVED BY
SERVING ITS
830 MENLO AVENUE SUITE 100 MENLO PARK CA 94025
CITATION SERVICE ISSUED/IN ORIGINAL HAYNER, 5/13/2019 5/16/2019 73625296 ATTORNEY

POSSESSION OF PETITION MARSHALL PICK-UP
SERVING AGENCY
CITATION SERVICE ISSUED/IN ORIGINAL REYNOLDS, 5/13/2019 5/16/2019 73625297 ATTORNEY
POSSESSION OF PETITION REMINGTON PICK-UP
SERVING AGENCY
CITATION SERVICE ORIGINAL SHORT, 5/13/2019 5/16/2019 6/8/2019 73625300 ATTORNEY
RETURN/EXECUTED PETITION TREVOR PICK-UP
CITATION SERVICE ASSIGNED ORIGINAL PREMIER LIVE 5/13/2019 73625301 ATTORNEY
TO CLERK/NOT PETITION PICK-UP
ISSUED
DOCUMENTS
Number Document Post Date Pgs
Jdgm
85737644 Citation 06/14/2019 2
85692829 Citation 06/12/2019 2
85480848 Citation ( Non-Resident Corporate ) 05/29/2019 3
85392075 Civil Process Pick-Up Form 05/16/2019 1
85218158 Plaintiffs' Original Petition 05/13/2019 13
Plaintiffs' Original Petition 05/13/2019
https://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/edocs/public/CaseDetailsPrinting.aspx?Get=CiWCQ9GGYJvUp... 6/21/2019
Exhibit E

HOUSTON DIVISION

and GLENN BLAKE, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
vs. § CASE NO. 4:19-cv-02250
§
§
Defendants. §
LIST OF ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD
Pursuant to Local Rule 81, Defendant Metallicus, Inc. a/k/a Metal (“Metallicus”) provides
the following list of all counsel of record:
Ryan Cook
rcook@sseklaw.com
Samuel B. Edwards
sedwards@sseklaw.com
Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas, LLP
1010 Lamar, Suite 900
713-227-2400 (Telephone)
713-227-7215 (Fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
elizabeth.chiaviello@morganlewis.com
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 4000
713-890-5000 (Telephone)
713-890-5001 (Fax)
Attorney for Defendant Metallicus, Inc. a/k/a Metal

Exhibit F

HOUSTON DIVISION

and GLENN BLAKE, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
vs. § CASE NO. 4:19-cv-02250
§
§
Defendants. §
INDEX OF MATTERS BEING FILED
Exhibit A: State Court Pleadings
Exhibit B: Consent of Co-Defendants
Exhibit C: Executed Process
Exhibit D: State Court Docket Sheet
Exhibit E: List of Counsel of Record
Exhibit F: Index of Matters being filed

JS 44 (Rev. 0$"#%) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Metallicus, Inc. a/k/a Metal, Marshall Hayner and Remington
Adam Kliebert, Gloria Blake, and Glenn Blake Reynolds, Trevor Short d/b/a Premier Live
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Elizabeth M. Chiaviello, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP,
Ryan Cook and Samuel Edwards, Shepherd, Smith, Edwards & Kantas, 1000 Louisiana St., Suite 4000, Houston, TX 77002; 713-890-5000
LLP, 1010 Lamar, Suite 900, Houston, TX 77002; 713-227-2400 (Attorney for Metallicus, Inc. a/k/a Metal)
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
" 1 U.S. Government " 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State " 1 " 1 Incorporated or Principal Place " 4 " 4
of Business In This State
" 2 U.S. Government " 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State " 2 " 2 Incorporated and Principal Place " 5 " 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a " 3 " 3 Foreign Nation " 6 " 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
" 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY " 625 Drug Related Seizure " 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 " 375 False Claims Act
" 120 Marine " 310 Airplane " 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 " 423 Withdrawal " 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
" 130 Miller Act " 315 Airplane Product Product Liability " 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
" 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability " 367 Health Care/ " 400 State Reapportionment
" 150 Recovery of Overpayment " 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS " 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury " 820 Copyrights " 430 Banks and Banking
" 151 Medicare Act " 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability " 830 Patent " 450 Commerce
" 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability " 368 Asbestos Personal " 835 Patent - Abbreviated " 460 Deportation
Student Loans " 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application " 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) " 345 Marine Product Liability " 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
" 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY " 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits " 350 Motor Vehicle " 370 Other Fraud " 710 Fair Labor Standards " 861 HIA (1395ff) " 485 Telephone Consumer
" 160 Stockholders’ Suits " 355 Motor Vehicle " 371 Truth in Lending Act " 862 Black Lung (923) Protection Act
" 190 Other Contract Product Liability " 380 Other Personal " 720 Labor/Management " 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) " 490 Cable/Sat TV
" 195 Contract Product Liability " 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations " 864 SSID Title XVI " 850 Securities/Commodities/
" 196 Franchise Injury " 385 Property Damage " 740 Railway Labor Act " 865 RSI (405(g)) Exchange
" 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability " 751 Family and Medical " 890 Other Statutory Actions
Medical Malpractice Leave Act " 891 Agricultural Acts
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS " 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS " 893 Environmental Matters
" 210 Land Condemnation " 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: " 791 Employee Retirement " 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff " 895 Freedom of Information
" 220 Foreclosure " 441 Voting " 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) Act
" 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment " 442 Employment " 510 Motions to Vacate " 871 IRS—Third Party " 896 Arbitration
" 240 Torts to Land " 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 " 899 Administrative Procedure
" 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations " 530 General Act/Review or Appeal of
" 290 All Other Real Property " 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - " 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION Agency Decision
Employment Other: " 462 Naturalization Application " 950 Constitutionality of
" 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - " 540 Mandamus & Other " 465 Other Immigration State Statutes
Other " 550 Civil Rights Actions
" 448 Education " 555 Prison Condition
" 560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
" 1 Original " 2 Removed from " 3 Remanded from " 4 Reinstated or " 5 Transferred from " 6 Multidistrict " 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, and 1446
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Violations of the Texas Securities Act, the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and various fraud allegations.
VII. REQUESTED IN " CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: " Yes " No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
06/21/2019 /s/ Elizabeth M. Chiaviello
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 0$"#%)
INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as
required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is
required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of
Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:
I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use
only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and
then the official, giving both name and title.
(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the
time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land
condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)
(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting
in this section "(see attachment)".
##" Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X"
in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.
United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.
United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.
Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment
to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes
precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.
Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the
citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity
cases.)
###" Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this
section for each principal party.
#$" Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code
that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
$" Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.
Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.
Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing
date.
Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.
Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or
multidistrict litigation transfers.
Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C.
Section 1407.
Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket. PLEASE
NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to changes in
statue.
$#" Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional
statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service
$##" Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.
Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.
Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.
$###" Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket
numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.
Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.

Metallicus Complaint

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Metallicus Complaint

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Case 4:19-cv-02250 Document 1 Filed on 06/21/19 in TXSD Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

ADAM KLIEBERT, GLORIA BLAKE, §

DEFENDANT METALLICUS, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL

2019-32946. In support of this Notice of Removal, Metallicus states as follows:

number 2019-32946 (“the State Court Action”).

misrepresentation arising out of Plaintiffs’ purported purchase of cryptocurrency from Metallicus.

III. BASIS FOR REMOVAL

4. The amount in controversy in this action exceeds the minimum required by 28

damages, and attorneys’ fees. See Exhibit A, ¶ 64 (“the Original Petition”).

Med. Ctr., 485 F.3d 793, 797–98 (5th Cir. 2007).

a resident of Harris County, Texas.” See id.

resident of Harris County, Texas.” See id.

9. Metallicus is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in

California. Therefore, Metallicus is a citizen of California and Delaware. 28 U.S.C. § 1331(c)(1).

11. Defendant Remington Reynolds is an individual who resides in the State of

Georgia, and is a citizen of Georgia.

before that date.

D. Consent of Other Defendants

Action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2)(A). See Exhibit B (“Consent to Removal”).

in the State Court Action. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2)(A).

IV. REQUIRED PROCESS AND PLEADINGS

(Exhibit E); and an index of matters being filed (Exhibit F).

District Court of Harris County, Texas.

additional relief to which it may be justly entitled.

Dated: June 21, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Elizabeth M. Chiaviello

State Court Action:

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

/s/ Elizabeth M. Chiaviello

21. Continuing to believe

22. Metal holdings

00 23. Ultimately, contrary

24. Unsurprisingly, the

25. Plaintiffs repeat

26. The investments

27. Defendants offered

28. Defendants and/or

('I the requirement

Securities Act in that

32. Additionally, and

33. Additionally, and

Securities Act as he had

thereon at the legal

35. Plaintiffs repeat

36. Defendants engaged

37. Plaintiffs are

39. Defendants made

41. Plaintiffs are

43. alleged with

44. The statements

46. The Defendants

47. Plaintiffs believed

49. Plaintiffs repeat

50. described herein,

53. Plaintiffs repeat

56. Defendants did

59. Plaintiffs repeat

63. result, the

66. Plaintiffs hereby

67. Plaintiffs demand

68. Pursuant to Texas

Prejudgment and post

sedw Vas) sse a w . t- orn