ALLERCA/ASHERA BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The "Ashera" Serval hybrid and hypoallergenic Allerca cat turned out to be scams. here is background information on the man behind a trail of scams. These include IntegraAssociates, Cerentis Broadcasting Co., Samba Wireless, Geneticas Life Sciences, ForeverPet, Genetiate, GeneSentinel, Cyntegra and Allerca. This webpage collates information from multiple sources, published and personal. The UK information comes from company databases and due diligence websites in the UK. Carradan frequently listed his business as "genetics". Note - there are almost 3500 companies registered at 2nd Floor, 145-157 St John Street, London, EC1V 4PY, just over 200 are active, over 3200 companies are either dissolved or in liquidation (including various Carradan ventures). US and Canada information comes from various sources including company registrations.
1991, UK. Simon Francis Campbell Brodie. Director at LINKX PLC. Director & Company Secretary at Inter European Finance Ltd. Minimal information. All dissolved.
1992, England: Brodie was charged with false accounting and 8 charges of theft, including swindling money from banks and double-charging customers' credit cards. This was connected to Cloudhoppers hot air balloon-flight business in East Sussex. It offered franchises for £200,000 pounds each and collapsed in 1992 leaving people out of pocket and owing £214,000 to banks. He claimed in 1992 (The Argus) to have grossed £1 million in the first year with ambitions to expand to a £50 million concern in the USA. Brodie announced the sale of Cloudhoppers, and claimed to be the largest ballooning company in the world despite having only only 2 balloons, for £4 million. He didn't pay his employees and his chief balloon pilot left, followed by other employees. He continued to take bookings for expensive balloon flights even after the Civil Aviation Authority revoked his company's license to fly. The company telephones were cut off, Brodie's car was repossessed and the company was evicted from its building.
1994, England: Brodie is convicted in the UK of 7 counts of false accounting. He was given a 2.5 years jail sentence for his part in Cloudhoppers, After serving less 1 year in jail, he left Britain and went to Toronto, Canada and then to the USA where court records show a string of financial offences and unpaid debts.
1996, UK. Brodies company Cybertech promises Lotus Notestraining. He was sued in the High Court for breach of employment contracts. 1996, UK. Brodie set up another Lotus Notes consultancy called called Interaxis.
1998. Toronto, Canada. Brodie promoted Integra Information Technology, a company that recruited non-computer-literate people in England to pay £15,000/$25,000 to take a three-week Lotus Notes training course by promising them highly paid contracting work. Computer Weekly, interviewed Integra clients and found "ex-course members struggling to complete their Notes certification on their own, left to fend for themselves in the job market, and grappling with huge debts for the exorbitant course fees." Brodie described himself as Integra's business development manager.
1999, Delaware, USA. Brodie founded Cerentis LLC. One of Cerentis' products was software training packages. Customers bought a $50,000 package and expected to be employed after training. According The Boston Globe (July 2007), one British customer was trained at California-based Alphalogix in 1999, but Brodie vanished before the 3 week course was completed and the promised job did not materialise. Computer Weekly and found Integra clients struggling to pay off huge debts for the exorbitant course fees. LA County court records show Alphalogix were owed $30,600 by Brodie who denies having ever heard of Alphalogix.
September 1999, New York. Cerentis proposes to use the web to create “the world's most powerful computer processor.” Set-up in the same way as the nonprofit SETI At Home project, Cerentis' Terra One venture would process data for clients, but would charge for the service. The Cerentis news release stated “in association with the biggest and best online retailers,” such as Amazon.com and Dell, in which users would build up credits that could be used to make purchases at online stores. Amazon.com and Dell have never had any association with either Cerentis or Brodie. Cerentis' mailing address was Brodie's New York home address. Cerentis owes more than $50,000 in state taxes and has numerous liens against it.
1999: Brodie and 2 Brodie-affiliated companies, Cerentis and Integra Associates, defaulted on a $72,280 promissory note.
1999 - 2000: There has been a report (which I have not been able to verify) that after San Diego, Brodie was active in Costa Rica during 2000 and that he left behind pending lawsuits. Boston-based "The Beantown Bloggery" comment says "He took a break to hide out here in Costa Rica where he ripped people off left and right, screwing the fattest, ugliest girl in town before taking her last $500 and being chased (literally) out of town."
2003: Geneticas Life Sciences, Inc. filed as a Domestic for Profit Corporation in the State of Florida and is no longer active. This corporate entity was filed approximately twelve years ago on Thursday, March 27, 2003 as recorded in documents filed with Florida Department of State.
2003: Geneticas Life Sciences is located in Los Angeles, CA. Geneticas Life Sciences industry is listed as Laboratory. There are no officers listed for this company. Simon Brodie served as the Director.
2003, Florida. Xifi Technology Services, Inc. & Xifi Networks, Inc. Both filed as Domestic for Profit Corporations in the State of Florida on Wednesday, May 7, 2003. Brodie is listed on corporation databases as director. No evidence of these entities trading. These corporations are no longer active according to documents filed with Florida Department of State.He may have intended to sell the company names.
2003?: Samba Wireless - Data Processing And Preparation, Internet Services. Registered in Florida. No evidence of this company trading.
"Xifi" and "Samba" are well known terms related to computing. These may have been registered as company name/ domain squatting.
2004 (court records). Brodie was using an alias, Simon Campbell, and was connected with Cerentis Corporation and Integra Associates. Brodie/Campbell had been sued a number of times in the Los Angeles Superior Court for contractual fraud, eviction, and unpaid debt.
Martch 2004: Foreverpet Biotechnologies, Inc. filed as an Articles of Incorporation in the State of California on Monday, March 29, 2004. This corporation is no longer active according to documents filed with California Secretary of State.
October 2004: Brodie turns up in California where he forms Geneticas Life Sciences. Its press releases and websites portray it as being at the forefront of pet cloning. It announces plans to genetically engineer allergen-free cats. It takes deposits to reserve cats in advance of their creation. Geneticas Life Scences has never cloned an animal.
December 2004: Colorado-based Transgenic Pets LLC sue Allerca and Brodie for stealing trade secrets and business plans. Brodie, representing Florida-based Geneticas Life Sciences, had posed as a potential investor in Transgenic Pets. He signed a nondisclosure agreement in order to access confidential information. In Sept 2004 he had signed articles of incorporation to create Allerca, with Transgenic founder David Avner as its president and had agreed to invest $2.5 million in the new company, but in October he told Avner that Geneticas would not participate. Instead, he incorporated Allerca in California and issued a press release about hypoallergenic cats based on Avner's proprietary information.
2005: Brodie's Los Angeles landlords win a judgment against Brodie for failure to pay his rent. Brodie tries to raise $500,000 to fund a San Diego animal diagnostics company, GeneSentinel (owned by Allerca), of which he was chairman, president and CEO although the company assets were only $3,000 and its debts were $200,000! GeneSentinel plans create tests to screen animal samples for genetic mutations. They have extensive discussions with Minneapolis-based Fair Isaac Corp regarding the development of a similar product using Fair Isaac technology. Negotiations break off in June 2005. Fair Isaac inform Allerca that any attempt to move ahead with an alternative technology would result in legal action if Fair Isaac believes Allerca is using or disclosing Fair Isaac's confidential information. Gene Sentinel becomes Cyntegra.
January 2006: Allerca Inc is a division of Geneticas. Brodie and Allerca were sued for defaulting on a $25,000 loan.
February 2006: Allerca was evicted from its San Diego HQ, which was also Brodie's home, for failing to pay the rent.
March 2006: Novartis Animal Health, makers of Sentinel pet medicines, sues GeneSentinel, Allerca and Brodie, for infringement of Novartis' Sentinel trademark and cyberpiracy. Brodie sells his stake in Allerca to an unidentified investment group, but remains a consultant.
April 2006: Novartis is granted a permanent injunction against Brodie and his companies. Around the same time, GeneSentinel lays off several employees, who are owed thousands of dollars in unpaid wages, and becomes Cyntegra. Cyntegra, with Brodie as CEO, becomes embroiled in legal action against IDEXX Laboratories over diagnostics for early detection of bird flu.
November 2006: California's Department of Corporations orders Brodie and Allerca to "desist and refrain" from offering or selling franchises until they are registered with the state.
February 2007: Brodie has a $285,000 federal tax lien placed against him by the Internal Revenue Service.
2007: Brodie formsFlexPetz, a pet rental company with outlets in New York, San Diego and Los Angeles. It planned a branch in Boston and one in London. Subscribers to the scheme could rent a pet for anything from a few hours to a few days. Scheme membership would cost $100 and then $50/month (these figures changed).
August 2007: Itchmo revealed that Brodie is the CEO of a company that owns pet-timeshare service Flexpetz. Brodie was CEO of Tetros Inc, which was purchased by ColdStar Capital in April 2007. A few days later, Flexpetz issued a press release describing itself as a wholly owned subsidiary of Tetros, who are both owned by ColdStar Capital. ColdStar is based out of the Cayman Islands. Brodie denied having any knowledge about ColdStar Capital, but retracted his denial when confronted with the SEC filing that listed him as CEO of Tetros Inc.
2007: Brodie listed as Chairman, CEO and chief financial officer at Asensia Inc (from April to September)
2008: FlexPetz dog rental scheme (with Marlena Cervantes) declared illegal in Massachusetts; anyone renting a dog can be fined $300. FlexPetz charged around $280/month for 4 dog-days and claimed the dogs are donated to FlexPetz. According to the SEC filings for Asensia/FlexPetz, the company does not adopt dogs and never intended to do so. SEC filings state that a FlexPetz dog has a useful life of 7 years. Note: shelters will not adopt out to situation where dogs are passed from person to person - something that is not good for a dog.
2008 Lifestyle Pets advertised $128,758 German Shepherds. Called "Titans" they were allegedly bred and trained for home security. Brodie's blurb claimed they were a hit in Japan and the Middle East within weeks of being launched. A standard Titan cost $89,151, while a Titan Ultra (guaranteed to be traced back to champion German shepherd bloodlines) cost $128,758. Titan Dogs Bred For Home Security
2008 Lifestyle Pets added the Jabari GD, a supposedly hypo-allergenic small dog (the photo depicts a brown cockerpoo-type dog).
June 2008: Ashera cats exported to The Netherlands DNA tested and prove to be Savannahs bred by Chris Shirk, Pennsylvania. Brodie changes name to Simon Carradan and now in Big Sky, Montana; sets up Carradan Skis claims to produce a unique brand of ski designed and crafted using a proprietary blend of materials never before seen in a ski. Deposits payable 6 months in advance, actual product appears non-existent. Brodie claimed the name change was to protect himself from radical elements opposed to Ashera/Allerca/FlexPetz after the San Diego Union Tribune were paid by Idexx to reveal where he lived, putting his life in danger. Carradan skis uses same mailing address as Flexpetz. His partner and front-woman in Carradan Skis and Flexpetz ventures is Marlena Cervantes (the pair appear to be more than just business partners). As with previous ventures, the address is just an office and there is no actual street address.
2009: Class action planned against Brodie/Lifestyle Pets regarding payment being taken for a kitten, but no kitten being supplied. Some purchasers claim to be still waiting after 18+ months, receiving neither a kitten nor their money back.
June 2009: Brodie/Carradan allegedly in Canada while partner Marlena Cervantes remained in Big Sky, occasionally visiting Canada.
June 2009: Forms Simon Carradan Vimentis Ltd. "VIMENTIS Brings the Wine Cork's Ritual and Romance to the Humble Screw Cap" Press release June 25, 2009 from VIMENTIS Ltd (via PRNewswire) by "Michael Thompson" who was allegedly the Vimentis PR man. The registered address is in London, England Now dissolved. (info available from Companies House).
2009:Carradan forms LP Global Ltd (LP Mondial Ltd), registered in London. He was Director (Genetics). Company now dissolved. (info available from Companies House).
2010. Several unsatisfied Allerca customers received a legal contract from Brodie offering them a refund if they sign a non-disclosure (gagging) order and agree not to pursue any further action against Lifestyle Pets. Would the gagging order simply ensure that customers can't reveal others whether they get a refund or not? This is the route to take in order to get a response from Brodie: (1) Contact your local District Attorney (the more powerful state-level Attorney General will be too busy with higher priority cases) about the rip-off. Send details of the case to the District Attorney from Santa Cruz, California, who are investigating Lifestyle Pets. (2) Because Lifestyle Pets' business crosses state lines, contact the FBI. This can be done online through their Internet Crime Complaint Center, but it is best to also contact an actual FBI investigator. Or contact the FBI office in San Diego, California which is gathering information from dozens of Brodie's victims. (3) Contact local media (radio, newspapers etc). They may have a consumer affairs reporter dedicated to tracking down fraudulent corporations. They might be interested in hearing about the case. This will help give information to people who could be taken in by Lifestyle Pets' fiction.
2010 (February: Santa Cruz County District Attorney's Office investigated whether a Live Oak woman was the victim of unfair business practices after she wired more than $5,000 to Allerca Lifestyle Pets in August 2008, and received neither a hypoallergenic kitty nor a refund. The woman had a list of 17 other victims. One victim in San Francisco said founder Simon Brodie's "core competency is stringing people along." Brodie claimed the victim declined a cat and inferred that some people were just too unreasonable to wait out the company's "purely provisional deadlines" necessary due to the real-life product. According to Brodie, each customer was aware of the terms and conditions of the sales agreement, which is "that an order is non-cancelable, non-refundable and that there is no time limitation on the business' obligation to deliver a pet." He also says he has begun to use an escrow service which guaranteed clients would get refunds if they deposited the full purchase price plus $180 Prosecutor Kelly Walker said the escrow idea was a good one. One customer, Jeremy Goodman, reported that Brodie used a different mobile phone number every time he returned a call. Goodman said that Brodie told him he was being unfairly prosecuted and was fleeing to Costa Rica. Goodman knew he would never see the kitten or the money and he had been "undeniably swindled by a British con man who possessed nothing more then the gift of gab and a decent press release." Kelly Walker subpoenaed the company and received reams of confidential data. Though unable to discuss specifics, he said that "blindfolding someone is not the same as conducting a double-blind study." The Santa Cruz, Calif., District Attorney's Office told ABC News that 25 customers had lodged complaints against Brodie, but the office had not brought an action against him because they were not able to find him
Santa Cruz County District Attorney investigating sale of hypoallergenic cats and related page Comments
2009/2010: Brodie claims he is being unfairly prosecuted and was fleeing to Costa Rica (seems unlikely as there were outstanding lawsuits there).
2010: Brodie's history of slick press releases and pet-related companies that didn't deliver are documented in Dog, Inc.: The Uncanny Inside Story of Cloning Man's Best Friend By John Woestendiek; hardback book published by Penguin 2010, ISBN-13: 978-1583333914 and also available for Kindle.
2011: Carradan forms Recognitas Ltd with Mrs Leyibet Padro, registered in London. Now dissolved. (info available from Companies House).
2013. In a lead story on July 17, 2013, ABC’s ‘The Lookout’ reported the results of its investigation into Allerca GD or LIFESTYLE PETS. See separate section below on this page. Brodie, who first fled to Canada under the alias Simon Carradan to sell fictional super-skis (or re-badged regular skis), was being actively investigated by US law agencies, but went into hiding in London.
1992, East Sussex, England. Simon Brodie was charged with false accounting and 8 charges of theft, including swindling money from banks and double-charging customers' credit cards. This was connected to Cloudhoppers hot air balloon-flight business in East Sussex. The company offered franchises for £200,000 pounds each, but collapsed in 1992 leaving people out of pocket and owing £214,000 to banks. He claimed in 1992 (reported by "The Argus") to have grossed £1 million in the first year with ambitions to expand to a £50 million concern in the USA. Brodie announced the sale of Cloudhoppers, and claimed to be the largest ballooning company in the world despite having only only 2 balloons, for £4 million. He had not paid his employees and his chief balloon pilot left, followed by other employees. The Civil Aviation Authority revoked the company's license to fly. Despite this, Brodie continued to take bookings for expensive balloon flights. The money funded a "high flyer" lifestyle: he drove a Lamborghini, worked out of plush offices in London, rented a large home and presented himself as a "dotcom boomer." Unpaid bills meant Cloudhoppers' company telephones were cut off, Brodie's car was repossessed and the company was evicted from its building. In 1994, he was convicted in the UK of 7 counts of false accounting and given a 2.5 years jail sentence. After serving less 1 year in jail, he left Britain and went to Toronto, Canada and then to the USA where court records show a string of financial offences and unpaid debts.
Translated new article: According to reports in an English newspaper, the Argus, Brodie was living large in 1991 when he drove a Lamborghini. Cloudhoppers, a hot air balloon company that fell to earth in the small town of Uckfield , owing banks some £214,000. He rebounded five years later with a computer software company called Cybertech in the tiny Kensington are of London, but within a year, the venture went bust too, leaving a trail of consultants who sued for back salary. [...] In one newspaper story, Brodie is identified as a Scottish "scientist" from Invernesshire. What is not on the Net: according to the Argus, in 1994, at the age of 31, Brodie was sentenced to 2.5 years in prison by the Hove Crown Court in east Sussex on seven counts of false accounting related to Cloudhoppers' fall. Amir Sheibany, now of Trans Union Credit and late of Cybertech, remembers his old boss well. "He seemed competent and energetic," Sheibany says. "Polished." Sheibany, 38, also remembers the lawsuit he and others filed against Brodie. We won a judgement of £ 35,000 pounds," he says," but we did not get any money. He said he never received any notification of the court case. "Then Shiebany says, he was gone.
Note: A Cloudhopper is the name of a type of hot air balloon, usually a one-person balloon.
CYBERTECHConsultants fight Cybertech. Computing. 07 Oct 1996
A group of software consultants took their former employer Barbados-registered Cybertech Corporation to the High Court after it failed to pay damages for breaching their contracts. Amir Sheibany, Andrew Gordon, Michael Gill and Ian Hobson took the action after Cybertech failed to pay more than £35,000 in damages for unpaid salaries. Cybertech, also had offices in the US and London, and was set up by Simon Brodie at the beginning of 1996 to supply Lotus Notes and SAP consultants to IT recruitment agencies. Software Personnel was among its clients. Amir Sheibany said Cybertech lured employees away from steady jobs with the promise of basic salaries of £40,000, bonuses and accredited Lotus Notes training in Barbados. "We want to warn others. Always check that employment contracts are 100% correct," he said. Solicitor Paul Redfern, for the consultants, said: "We have appealed to the High Court following the company's failure to pay up and are awaiting a hearing date. Brodie claimed not to have got any court proceedings, a claim we deny, and now wants to put forward a defence. But we plan to ask the court to dismiss this application.". Brodie had also set up another Notes consultancy, Interaxis Group. He was not available for comment.
Information from the company registration lists Simon Francis Campbell Brodie as director of Cybertech Uk Limited in April 1996. Registered address was Fustic House, Fustic, St Luce W1 Barbados. Company address: Cyertech UK Ltd, London House, 271-273 King Street, London, W6 9LZ (Registering his companies offshore is a common theme.)
From an advert on Google Groups: CyBerTech Corporation, a leading Lotus Business Partner specialising in Lotus Notes Consultancy, seeks an experienced IT Business Executive with good Lotus Notes knoweledge to manage our London office as part of our on-going international expansion. The roles include day to day management of internal administration/IT and sales managers, consultant liason, and recruitment for both the UK and Europe. Based in central London, this is an ideal opportunity for someone with an entrepreneurial flair and solid management skills. Excellent salary and incentive package in excess of £100k p.a. for the right person. Please contact Simon Brodie at our London office [...]
CyBerTech Corporation is an international IT consultancy specialising in Lotus Notes. CyBerTech Corporation Consultancy is rapidly expanding its operations in the United Kingdom and Europe and is currently seeking to recruit Certified Lotus Notes Specialists or persons with at least two years similar Notes experience. As such we are offering permanent employment based in the United Kingdom and Europe to those applications who meet the required criteria; the positions are due to start 1st February 1996. Key features of the position include: Annual Base Salary of US$65,000 (US$100,000+ with overtime). Choice of United Kingdom and European Locations. Relocation Expenses. Access to Personal Benefits Package.
Information on CyBerTech at Company Check (UK) links Simon Francis Campbell Brodie to the following companies:
March 1991. Director at LINKX PLC. Company is dissolved.
March 1991. Director & Company Secretary at Inter European Finance Ltd. Company is dissolved.
Inter European Finance Ltd. Simon Francis Campbell Brodie, Secretary, 5 Mar 1991. Julian Meryn Brodie(born 1925 - father?). Director/Computer Salesperson, 5 Mar 1991. Simon Francis Campbell Brodie, Director, 5 Mar 1991. Regstered address was 22 Montpelier Row Twickenham Middlesex TW1 2NQ. LINKX PLC seems to have the same directors.
INTEGRAASSOCIATES / INTEGRA INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Integra Information Technology recruited non-computer-literate people in England to pay £15,000/$25,000 to take a three-week Lotus Notes training course by promising them highly paid contracting work. The price tag included flights and accommodation at Integra's training center in Toronto. The cost of similar Lotus training n the UK, which typically required months to complete, was only about £2,000 pounds/$3,300. Computer Weekly, interviewed Integra clients and found "ex-course members struggling to complete their Notes certification on their own, left to fend for themselves in the job market, and grappling with huge debts for the exorbitant course fees." Brodie described himself as Integra's business development manager
28 Oct 1998. Computing magazine carried an article “Delays to [Lotus] Notes course”. In summary this said that would-be Lotus Notes consultants who paid £15,000 to attend a Lotus Notes training course were repeatedly told their course had been delayed and feared being denied a refund. Integra Information Technology's course should have been held in Canada in August 1998 but was postponed three times by October 1998. Brodie said the course's terms allow rescheduling. He said he had done so because of delays in the new versions (5.0) of Lotus Notes. One participant asked Integra for a refund of the full price he paid in August. Integra told him that a refund would be payable providing that someone else took the place, and providing the participant complied with a gagging clause. The participant sent a copy of that letter to "Computing" magazine. "You agree to keep this matter confidential before and after repayment, and that [if] information is disclosed, to pay Integra an amount equal to the programme fee of #£4,950." The letter was signed by Integra's managing director, Simon Brodie. Lotus confirmed it had received a complaint, but declined to comment (it's likely they were unaware of Brodie's course). Integra, a company wholly owned by a Sark-based, off-shore trust, had been served a summons from another course participant who had completed the training but who did not receive the promised after-training support.
Note: Not the same as Integra Associates.
Cerentis LLC, 20 Haarlem Avenue #404, White Plains, NY 10603. Categorized under Online Services Technology Consultants. Records show it was established in 1999 and incorporated in New York. Principal - Simon Brodie. The only other information related to Cerentis Broadcasting is Ocean FM (95.5 FM), a radio station in the Cayman Islands, British West Indies, owned by Cerentis Broadcasting Systems. It aired a classic hits music format. Its last license was issued on 11 December, 2003. It went off the air in late 2006 and was put up for sale but technical and financial issues made such a sale untenable and the government revoked the license on 16 August, 2007. Slogan: Grand Cayman's Hit Music - We Play Everything.
GENETICAS AND ITS DIVISIONS
GENETICAS [Life Sciences] was established to help those hoping to preserve genetic material for future use in cloning (when available) or procedures not yet developed. As a company working with the leading edge of research and the application of assisted reproductive technologies, including nuclear transfer, GENETICAS is keenly aware of what the very near future might hold for cloning and related human and animal health sciences. GENETICAS's commercial cloning division provides cloning services to worldwide clients. The ALLERCA division is currently developing the world's first patented allergen free cat, expected for 2007. A special project, the GENETICAS ARK, aims to prevent the extinction of the many species that are in danger of disappearing from our planet by storing their DNA, and to hopefully reproduce and reintroduce these animals into future protected habitats. CONTACT INFORMATION: Simon Brodie, Geneticas Life Sciences<.P>
A division of Geneticas called Foreverpet Biotechnologies, Inc. filed as an Articles of Incorporation in the State of California in March 2004. This corporation is no longer active according to documents filed with the California Secretary of State. Its registered address was 11400 W Olympic Blvd Los Angeles, CA 90064. Despite claims of orders pouring in, they did not cryopreserve cells or clone any animals. A Press Release on August 22, 2004 claimed: "ForeverPet, a division of Geneticas Life Sciences, today announced the launch of the ForeverPet cat cloning service for cat owners. Priced at $19,950 this new cloning service is the most economically priced of all cat cloning services currently on the market, and adds cat cloning to ForeverPet's other services, including DNA cell banking and horse cloning. ForeverPet, under the slogan "For More Than A Lifetime", allows pet owners to cryopreserve a tiny biopsy that safely preserves their pet's DNA for future use in the production of an identical clone. [....] $19,950 for the first clone, with additional clones of the same donor animal priced at $4,995 each , ForeverPet's pricing is close to a third of the competition's."
Simon Brodie, CEO of Geneticas Life Sciences stated, "As a company that provides commercial cell banking, we constantly receive calls from distressed pet owners whose animals are terminal or that just passed. One of the biggest deterrents to cryopreserving their pet's DNA was cost, with other companies charging upwards of $800. ForeverPet reduced the price to less than $300, which resulted in many more pet owners taking advantage of our DNA preservation services. However, owners have often shown reluctance to cell bank their pet's DNA without a firm timeframe for pet cloning, or concerns that the cost would be out of the reach of most pet owners. After a careful analysis, ForeverPet has started to offer cat cloning at a price that while still very high, will invariably allow us to develop news techniques and processes that aim to reduce the price to $2,000 per clone. States Brodie: "The response from pet owners has been amazing. Of course, we make it clear that affordable pet cloning is down the line. But many are simply comforted knowing that for those that can afford the cost, producing a clone of their cat is now a reality. As for those groups that are against animal cloning given the large number of dogs and cats in shelters, Brodie states, "Although we praise the good work performed by animal welfare groups. We do not see a solid argument. If a cat lover has chosen to spend $2,000 on a pedigree animal, he is simply not going to adopt an animal from a shelter. If anything, there are a number of serious arguments in pet cloning's favor. Pet cloning could actually reduce the number of unwanted animals given that an owner might feel happier having their pet neutered if they knew he or she could be cloned. And only one clone would be produced instead of a whole litter. It also might be easier to predict the temperament of a puppy when it grows up. Owners would be less likely to discard their playful puppy when it turns into a destructive dog. Many are unaware that over four million pets are abandoned each year simply due to negative behavioral traits, something that is less likely in a clone" … Cloning a pet cat starts by taking some cells of the cat, a simple process performed by a ForeverPet approved veterinarian [...] sends it to our labs for use as the base of producing a clone. The estimated time from delivery of the cells to delivery of a clone is 6-9 months, depending on the company's waiting list.
A Geneticas "Genetiate" press release form Nov 2004. It never took off and is now often discounted as a hoax. The press releases read "With over 500,000 collisions between cars and deer every year, the cost in lives and money is staggering. While insurers pay over a billion dollars in claims annually, over 200 people are killed. Countless other drivers and passengers suffer injuries and other serious medical complications. Many deer and their young suffer the same fate. By implanting the gene of a special jellyfish into deer, the transgenic NIGHTSAVE deer produced by GENETIATE (patent pending) have fluorescing hair and skin when illuminated by car headlights. The implanted gene has no other effect on the deer, who appear normal in daylight. The NIGHTSAVE project aims to reduce the number of night time deer/auto collisions, saving the lives of both deer and people." What about all the wild non-glow in the dark deer? Predators and night-time hunters would quickly pick off the glowing deer.
GeneSentinel was supposedly a canine flu test. This Allerca subsidiary [Allerca being part of Geneticas] announced it had developed a rapid test that would detect canine influenza. Its press release says the "diagnostic technology is similar to that used to detect the avian flu and SARS in humans." Threat of legal action from Minneapolis-based Fair Isaac Corp as Brodie had gained access to some of their confidential information. GeneSentinel became Cyntegra. Cyntegra was supposedly a flu test for cats and dogs. Cyntegra's Viogenix Duo claimed to be a diagnostic test based on the same technology as GeneSentinel's canine flu test. According to the PR, it could detect H5N1 in cats and dogs and H3N8 in dogs. Cyntegra was registered to offices vacated by Allerca in January 2006 (Allerca were being sued for not paying rent). Legal action against IDEXX Laboratories over diagnostics for early detection of bird flu. There was no evidence of Cyntegra on Allerca's Web site.
Registered Address: 777 6th Avenue Apt 419, San Diego, CA 92101-7076.
29th Nov 2005 Registered trademark
21 March 2006 TEAS Express Abandonment filed for trademark
22 March 2006 Express Abandonment Notice Mailed
Here are excerpts from their Nov 29 Press Release.:
GENESENTINEL today announced the launch of a highly accurate test to detect the highly contagious influenza virus that is affecting dogs and is believed likely to spread throughout the USA. The GENESENTINEL diagnostic technology is similar to that used to detect the avian flu and SARS in humans. Simon Brodie, CEO of GENESENTINEL, states, "As of today, canine influenza has been diagnosed in 18 states, although we presume it is present in many more states. Early numbers suggest that one in one hundred infected dogs will die. However, some researchers have placed the figure as high as one in ten, and the number could be higher due to misdiagnosis of the virus as 'kennel cough.' Symptoms generally appear two to five days after a dog is exposed to the virus and of those infected, 20 percent show no signs of disease. Early diagnosis using our GENESENTINEL test is critical in order to quarantine and treat the infected dog. There is no vaccination available at this time." He cited Dr. Joan McMindes of the Native Palm Animal Hospital in Jupiter, Florida about the prevalence of canine flu, and he gave some blurb about the impact of canine flu on doggy events. Brodie said "With the holiday season approaching and an increased demand for boarding, we are encouraging kennels to test every dog before admittance and our website will begin to list all boarding facilities where the GENESENTINEL test is routinely performed."
The press release claimed: GENESENTINEL is the first company to commercialize a highly accurate molecular diagnostic for the canine flu that can provide rapid results to veterinarians. Positive results of the screening test are considered a presumptive identification of canine influenza. GENESENTINEL allows veterinarians to screen dogs with a range of flu-like symptoms at an affordable cost to the pet owner. GENESENTINEL is a subsidiary of ALLERCA(TM) Inc., a privately-held biotechnology company headquartered in San Diego, California, focused on improving the lives of companion animals and their owners.
GeneSentinel planned to create a test to detect pathogens and genetic mutations in samples from animals, but the project had the potential to generate legal problems. Allerca, the parent of GeneSentinel, had extensive discussions with Minneapolis-based Fair Isaac Corp. regarding the development of a similar product using Fair Isaac technology, but negotiations broke off in June 2005, according to the memo. Fair Isaac's legal counsel informed Allerca that if it moved forward with an alternative technology, Fair Isaac would take legal action if it believed Allerca was using or disclosing Fair Isaac's confidential information.
GENETICAS GENEANGEL & PHARMASTEM
GeneAngel'S VP was Aniko Kaiser of Geneticas Life Sciences. Aniko Kaiser also appears in the press release "ForeverPet Launches First Low Cost Pre-Cloning Service for Pet Owners".
Wayne, PA, December 3, 2003 – PharmaStem Therapeutics, Inc. and GeneAngel, Inc. today announced that they have entered into an agreement under which GeneAngel has obtained a license to PharmaStem’s patent portfolio. This represents the 4th license PharmaStem has granted to umbilical cord blood banks. [PharmaStem had just won a patent infringement case and] since then "cord blood banks have stepped forward to secure a license from PharmaStem. GeneAngel is the first of this ‘new wave’ of licensees, with more to come in the near future.”
Aniko Kaiser, Vice President of GeneAngel stated: “Obtaining a PharmaStem license ensures that GeneAngel can continue to position itself as a leading cord blood banking company. GeneAngel now provides a level of comfort to a parent not offered by non-PharmaStem licensed companies. Consider that some of those cord blood companies were ordered just this month to pay millions of dollars in damages for willful infringements of PharmaStem’s patents, and one can appreciate how anxious parents have now become. One direct effect of this judgment has been a heightened concern amongst parents who already stored with the infringing banks, and what might happen to their child's stored stem cells in the future. This concern led GeneAngel to bring forward the launch of the GeneSentinel transfer program that allows those parents to transfer their child’s stored stem cells to a GeneAngel’s secure facility. Given the recent turmoil, GeneAngel is offering to collect and transfer those stem cells at no cost to parents.”
HEMASTEM THERAPEUTICS INC (GENETICAS LIFE SCIENCES)
This is from umbilical cord blood/cell bank directory information and press releases.
Geneticas Life Sciences originally entered the [umbilical] cord blood market in 2003 with the autologous bank GeneAngel, which had a unique pricing concept: No processing fee, but a storage fee of $49.95 was charged every month indefinitely. In exchange for the on-going storage fee, GeneAngel offered parents health insurance: $100,000 if their child developed a disease treatable by cord blood transplant. Perhaps not surprisingly, they could not find customers willing to pay $10,789.20 over 18 years against the odds of one child developing a transplantable disease. Hence, they reorganized and launched HemaStem/Hemalife. In Summer 2004 it was in the process of changing its name to "HemaLife"
"HemaStem is owned by Geneticas Life Sciences, Inc., a company specializing in biological insurance: they have divisions which bank the genes of endangered species, clone domestic animals, have a registry of human gene donors for the creation of designer babies, and bank the stem cells in cord blood. Website is in English and Spanish."
OFFICE: Main office located in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
STORAGE: Uses two laboratories: USA lab is Community Blood Services, Paramus, NJ; Canadian lab is at Stem Sciences Inc. in North York, Ontario.
SERVICES & DISCOUNT OPTIONS: Provides their patented StemGuard [TM] collection kit.
Community Blood Services laboratory in Paramus, NJ, processes all cord blood units by the same two-step method: first a sedimentation stage with the chemical Hespan; then a gentle spin cycle for further cell separation. The final red cell hematocrit is only about 2%. Every bank which stores at Community Blood Services has a separate freezer. The transplant quota is from the public bank at Community Blood Services. Enrollment fee only charged once per family. Price includes shipping by courier service. First year storage included in processing fees. Prepay 10 yrs storage for $1299 (save $191).
According to the company blurb: Established in 2000 (incorporation date says 2004), HemaStem Therapeutics was a privately held Canadian Federal Corporation that researches and develops technologies and procedures for the isolation, preservation, and therapeutic use of adult stem cells. They focus mainly on the isolation, cultivation, and storage of adult stem cells. HemaStem believes firmly that patients and families should have the opportunity to have a supply of healthy stem cells stored in a biological bank, which may be used for future stem cell therapies if needed. Stem cells are compatible with the patients own genetics to prevent problems with immunogenic incompatibilities. HemaStem believes that today’s miracles are tomorrows treatments.
Company Status - Dissolved For Non Compliance
Incorporation Date - February 2004
Dissolution Date - January 2012
Company Type - Non-distributing corporation with 50 or fewer shareholders
Registered Address: 4263 Sherwoodtowne Blvd Suite 303 Mississauga, Ontario L4Z 1Y5
Registered Address - 1500 Royal Centre, 1055 West Georgia Street, P.O. Box 1111, Vancouver BC, V6E 4N7, Canada
The directors were John Soliven-Llaguno, Alanna Harrison, Douglas Dunn, Ayab Lulat (these appeared to have been sucked into the Geneticas scheme)
From the Press Release: "We research and develop procedures and technologies for the isolation, preservation, and therapeutic use of adult stem cells. In particular, our focus is the isolation, cultivation and storage of adult stem cells collected from tissue disposed of at birth and stem cells derived from lipoaspirate - a waste product of liposuction. HemaStem Therapeutics Inc. is currently researching two new stem cell platforms focussing on novel sources of stem cells and expansion technology. We have completed five collections and isolation of a new source of stem cells at birth. Established in 1999 by two families, HemaStem brought to market its first commercialized adult stem cell platform in 2002. HemaStem first stage placental umbilical cord blood stem cell isolation technology known as HemaLife, is based on licenced US patents # 5,004,681. # 5,192,553 , # 6,461,645 , # 6,569,427, and # 6,605, 275. The name HemaStem (pronounced hee-mah-stem) is derived from the Greek word 'haima' which means blood and combined with the English word stem. HemaStem & 'Today's Miracles Are Tomorrows Treatments' is a registered trademark of HemaStem Inc. Our logo consist of a dark solid circle and surround by three inverted crescents depicts the isolation and harnessing of the potential possibilities of stem cells biology."
Note: HA company called Hemalife LLC/HemaLife Medical LLC founded in 2004 appears unrelated to HemaStem/HemaLife.
July 2006 "US diagnostics specialist IDEXX faces an antitrust, unfair competition lawsuit from a small Californian firm named Cyntegra, while at the same time questions are being asked over the history of Simon Brodie, Cyntegra's chief executive." In the guise of Cyntegra, it seems that Brodie hoped to make money through suing IDEXX Laboratories. IDEXX first asked for the case to be dismissed, but it went to court and judgment went against Cyntegra Inc who did not actually have a product, any employees or even a viable business plan. Here's a press release from Cyntegra (Brodie).
SAN DIEGO, Dec. 5 2006 (PRNewswire) - CYNTEGRA Inc., the developer of a revolutionary molecular pathogen diagnostic system capable of the simultaneous detection of dozens of serious disease agents in pets, has followed its filing of a complaint against IDEXX Laboratories, Inc. in the Central District Court of California, with a motion for Preliminary Injunction. In the complaint, CYNTEGRA seeks the termination of IDEXX's practices of "exclusive dealing," in which IDEXX requires that its distributors, who are the major distributors of veterinary products in the U.S. to veterinarians, refrain from selling the products of other companies that IDEXX defines as "competitive." CYNTEGRA maintains that IDEXX has gone so far as to prevent new products, such as the cutting-edge veterinary diagnostics developed by CYNTEGRA, from entering the market. In the complaint, CYNTEGRA alleges that IDEXX threatened its distributors if they carried CYNTEGRA's products, resulting in the cancellation of millions of dollars in orders for CYNTEGRA.
CYNTEGRA has moved for the injunction after a recent outbreak of bird flu in South Korea resulted in the forced slaughter of thousands of cats and dogs, for fear that these companion animals may transmit the virus to humans. Transmission of the bird flu to dogs and cats has been demonstrated, and the CYNTEGRA molecular diagnostic panel includes a rapid, sensitive test for bird flu and its variants that occur in dogs and cats. The CYNTEGRA panels are designed to provide periodic "wellness" testing in these companion animals, in order to rapidly detect serious diseases, including bird flu during the early stages of infection, compared to the later stage detection offered by tests sold by IDEXX. CYNTEGRA believes that without this rapid detection tool, U.S. veterinarians, animal health workers and pet owners may be risking greater personal exposure to the virus. CYNTEGRA is concerned that without a fast, cost-effective method of detection available to veterinarians, a potential bird flu pandemic in companion pets in the USA could result in the US government taking actions similar to the South Korean government, and forcing the euthanasia of millions of pets.
Dr. Jeffrey Werber, a Los Angeles veterinarian and a frequent commentator of veterinary medical issues, has stated, in support of CYNTEGRA's motion for preliminary injunction: "It is my opinion that the CYNTEGRA molecular diagnostic panels, capable of detecting larger numbers of pathogens in a single sample from an animal, offer a huge benefit to the public, with respect to reducing costs for detecting, treating and preventing the spread of a number of common and serious infections in animals. The savings would be in the millions, if not billions of dollars. To the extent early detection could also reduce the spread of diseases such as the avian flu, which are transmitted from animals to humans, the savings in terms of lives, is, of course, priceless."
IDEXX was not successful in obtaining dismissal from the court of CYNTEGRA's claims for unfair competition in its complaint, and CYNTEGRA has also requested the help of the U.S. Department of Justice in investigating IDEXX's practices.
CYNTEGRA, INC. v. IDEXX LABORATORIES, INC. No. CV 06-4170 PSG (CTx).
A Court Order granted IDEXX's Motion (legal request) for Summary Judgment after considering the parties' papers (deposited as evidence) and oral arguments at the hearing on October 22, 2007. A formal summary of the Court's proceedings, rationale and judgment is published online (plenty of references to various Acts and to other legal cases). I've avoided legal-ese as much as possible to make it comprehensible to non US citizens.
October 25, 2007 - United States District Court, C.D. California.
Plaintiff - Cyntegra inc.
Defendant - Idexx Laboratories, Inc.
District Judge - Philip S Gutierrez
Idexx develops and sells a variety of products used by veterinarians to diagnose and treat illnesses in companion animals, including analyzers used to test specimens in-clinic, pharmaceuticals and reference laboratory services (Undisputed fact). Cyntegra claimed to have developed innovative animal diagnostic products that would permit the rapid and sensitive detection of one or more preselected target substances in a single biological sample from an animal, using genomic or "molecular diagnostic methods." Claimed this is superior to antibody detection tests. Plaintiff was planning to outsource its laboratory work.
On June 30, 2006, Plaintiff initiated this lawsuit against Defendant claiming "monopolization of trade" by IDEXX and that distributors of IDEXX products are not permitted to offer competitor products. On March 13, 2007, IDEXX requested summary judgment, but The Court granted Cyntegra a continuance until September 10, 2007 to investigate. Summary judgment is proper only when the party proposing summary judgment (in this case IDEXX) can prove there is no genuine material fact.
IDEXX contended that Cyntegra's antitrust claims must fail because Cyntegra never had and did not currently have any products or services, relevant to this case, to sell. Cyntegra argued that they were being prevented from entering the market. The court considered four standard criteria: (1) The background and experience of Cyntegra in his prospective business (2) Positive action by Cyntegra to engage in the proposed business (3) The ability of Cynbtegra to finance the business and the purchase of equipment and facilities necessary to engage in the business (4) The consummation (satisfactory completion) of contracts by Cyntegra.
(1) Cyntegra's sole employee and founder, Brodie, had little background or experience in the market of molecular diagnostic testing. Brodie was unaware of differences between certain common diagnostic testing techniques. In addition, Brodie testified at deposition that he had never taken a course of a technical or scientific nature, or any courses that focussed on management or business.
(2) The deposited evidence showed that any steps Cyntegra took to engage in the proposed business were only preliminary or exploratory in nature. For example, although Brodie contended he developed marketing through face-to-face time with veterinarians, conducted presentations to veterinary offices, visited clinics, presented at conventions, and spoke with veterinarians who suggested specific pathogens they would like, these actions merely indicated that he was exploring the market. IDEXX presented evidence that Cyntegra had never had an office except for one located for a short time at the residence of Robert Stephenson. In addition, Brodie never developed a formal business plan,had no other employees besides its founder Brodie, never acquired a laboratory or employed a laboratory manager, never contacted an investment bank or venture capital firm to raise capital, and had never obtained a license to sell the canine influenza test, one of the few products it purported to sell. Cyntegra failed to provide evidence supporting its claim of having a patent pending for its veterinary diagnostic system.
(3) Cyntegra had never hired employees, leased equipment or vehicles, or leased a reference laboratory. Cyntegra claimed this was because it planned to use technology developed by other companies in order to reduce its own research and development costs. The fact that Cyntegra could not even afford to maintain its website and server was strong evidence of its inability to finance its business venture. Brodie testified that one of his main steps in 2007 was to seek additional investment, but provided no evidence of success in securing the additional investment.
(4) No evidence that Cyntegra had consummated any contracts. Cyntegra's emails with Butler Animal Health Supply, MWI Vet. Supply Co., and Columbus Serum Co., merely indicated the process of negotiating distribution arrangements for its (non-existent) products. Such negotiations are not "business or property" deserving of antitrust protection. It was unclear whether Cyntegra ever had any products to sell. Demonstrating that a new diagnostic product is viable requires validation testing and other steps. The Veterinary Information Network cautioned veterinarians not to purchase Plaintiffs canine influenza sample collection kit because it was not supported by validation testing. Brodie admitted that "additional validation may have been required" for its products.
Cyntegra failed to show that IDEXX owned a dominant share of market power in the relevant market of in-clinic diagnostic tests and reference laboratory services. IDEXX provided undisputed evidence that its market share is less than 40%,3 and that a competing distributor, VCA Antech, had revenues more than twice those of IDEXX. IDEXX provided evidence that two other suppliers of reference lab services, Zooligix and VDXI, had recently entered the market and that a new collaboration between VCA Antech (IDEXX's largest competitor) and Fair Isaac Diagnostics, was just announced in May 2007. Fair Isaacs was selling molecular diagnostic products exclusively through VCA Antech, demonstrating that a manufacturer of molecular diagnostic tests for animals found a channel to bring its products to market. Additionally, without a competing product, Cyntegra could not show it was "adversely affected" by Defendant's allegedly illegal "tying arrangement", and that claim also had no standing.
"Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. It is hereby ordered that this case be DISMISSED in its entirety, with prejudice."
Brodie took this to Appeal on April 13, 2009 at Pasadena, California before Fernandes, Silverman & Callahan, Circuit Judges.
CYNTEGRA, INC. v. IDEXX LABORATORIES, INC.
All of the District Court’s orders were challenged on appeal.
The Appeal court affirmed the decisions on the grounds that Cyntegra submitted materially deficient records (documents) and paltry arguments that were almost all unsupported by reference to documents or legal authority. It reviewed the merits of the alleged errors and concluded that the district court were not in error. They did not consider Cyntegra’s argument that the district court erred by considering Dr. Dorman’s expert rebuttal report, an argument Cyntegra forwarded in a single conclusory sentence unsupported by reference to records or legal authority. The district court’s denial of Cyntegra’s motion to reconsider Magistrate Judge Turchin’s order limiting certain discovery to a five-year period was not “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” The order permitted Cyntegra to conduct significant “historical” discovery into the distribution agreements at the heart of this case. The district court reasonably balanced Cyntegra’s need for historical discovery and the burden on IDEXX of producing decades-old documents that are only remotely relevant to the case.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Cyntegra’s application for a continuance of the summary judgment hearing. Cyntegra was not diligent in pursuing discovery, seeking a continuance, or seeking modification of the scheduling order. Cyntegra’s counsel contributed to discovery delays. The district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing an adverse inference instruction sanction against Cyntegra for spoliation of (withholding/destroying) evidence. Both of Cyntegra’s arguments on appeal lacked merit. The district court correctly concluded that the lost or destroyed information was relevant to IDEXX’s antitrust standing defense, which raised questions about Cyntegra’s preparedness to enter the marketplace. The district court also correctly concluded that IDEXX suffered prejudice because it was deprived of relevant, non-cumulative evidence to support its theories in defense of the case.
Cyntegra did not cite, and independent research did not uncover, legal authority supporting the argument that the district court abused its discretion by striking Dr. Mody’s expert rebuttal report. Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Cyntegra’s request for leave to file an untimely motion to exclude IDEXX’s expert testimony. Cyntegra waited to file its motion until four days before the law and motion cut-off. Although Cyntegra’s counsel argued before the district court that she could not file the motion earlier for good cause due to a medical emergency, the district court noted that during the supposed period of medical emergency, she was able to file at least six exparte applications, as well as other motions and oppositions. Moreover, Cyntegra failed to seek leave in a timely manner notwithstanding the fact that it had provided weeks of notice regarding its intent to challenge IDEXX’s expert testimony. We cannot find an abuse of discretion on this record.
Turning to Cyntegra’s substantive antitrust claims, the appeal judges affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of IDEXX because, on the present record, Cyntegra did not demonstrate that there were genuine factual reasons for Cyntegra to pursue its antitrust claims. In order to establish antitrust standing, Cyntegra would have to prove antitrust injury. “Only an actual competitor or one ready to be a competitor can suffer antitrust injury.” A prospective participant “has standing if he can show a genuine intent to enter the market and a preparedness to do so. The appeal reviewed the 4 criteria detailed above and concluded that, as a matter of law, Cyntegra lacked antitrust standing. Cyntegra had meager background or experience in the animal testing services industry. Its founder and CEO Simon Brodie, had no background education or experience in molecular diagnostic testing, or in the relevant science, technology, and business generally. Except for Dr. Okumabua’s declaration that he provided roughly six months of research and development assistance to Cyntegra, the evidence indicated that Cyntegra operated through a skeleton crew of part-time outside consultants who lacked any background or experience in the prospective business. The record also belied Cyntegra’s claim that it had consulted with a veterinarian on its product line, as Dr. Werber only acted as a litigation consultant. The record also indicated that Cyntegra had taken only preliminary steps to engage in its proposed business. Even considering the e-mails suggesting negotiations with three distributors and potential pre-orders for its product, there was scant evidence that Cyntengra’s were making positive efforts to enter the market. Noticeably absent was documentary evidence regarding the actual production of the testing kits Cyntegra claimed to sell. Cyntegra had never leased any commercial office space, equipment, or a laboratory. Although Cyntegra contended that it proposed to use outside laboratories to process testing samples, there was no record the supposed agreements it had with two outside laboratories.
Cyntegra submitted no evidence in the record (apart from Brodie’s declaration and deposition testimony) to support its claim that it had filed patent applications for its canine and feline diagnostic tests. In addition, Cyntegra had not conducted appropriate validation testing of its product, which is a significant step toward acceptance of a credible product in the marketplace. In addition, Cyntegra submitted no specific evidence of its ability to finance its nascent enterprise or evidence of any ongoing efforts to raise capital in order to enter the market. Finally, Cyntegra produced no evidence of consummated contracts with distributors or end-users, and its counsel confirmed at oral argument that it had no consummated contracts. Similarly, Cyntegra produced no evidence of other types of contracts that one might expect from a business that is ready to enter the marketplace, such as contracts with its consultants, suppliers, manufacturers, or the outside laboratories Cyntegra intended to use to test samples. Based on those records, the Appeal judges concluded that Cyntegra lacked antitrust standing and there was no substance to its antitrust claims against IDEXX. As stipulated by Cyntegra’s counsel, none of Cyntegra’s remaining claims survived summary judgment based on that lack of antitrust standing. Therefore the district court properly granted summary judgment on Cyntergra’s antitrust claims. The district court’s orders, that were challenged by this appeal, were AFFIRMED.
IDEXX Laboratories Prevails in Antitrust Case (2nd Nov, 2007)
The court dismissed all eight claims against IDEXX. Earlier this year, IDEXX defeated Cyntegra's motion for preliminary injunction seeking to prevent IDEXX from enforcing its distribution agreements and offering certain bundled products.
CEO With Sordid Past Behind Flexpetz Dog Sharing Service
FlexPetz Press Release
Press Release: World's only Pininfarina-designed hotel is home to first Flexpetz canine ambassador program. For pet-deprived hotel guests unable to travel with their own dogs or wanting to feel more at home when they travel, the Flexpetz Canine Hotel Ambassador program aims to provide that sense of familiarity and comfort. Guests at the exclusive Keating hotel in San Diego now have an opportunity to get their doggy fix with the launch of the first Flexpetz Canine Hotel AmbassadorTM program. The hotel's newest guest ambassador, a gorgeous black Afghan hound named Rupert, meets and greets guests upon arrival and along with his knowledgeable Flexpetz handler, acts as a formidable city tour guide. Rupert is available to accompany guests on walks throughout San Diego's historic Gaslamp Quarter, on shopping trips to the outdoor malls or just spending time with guests in the hotel. Quickly becoming a local celebrity, Rupert even has his own business cards and hotel e-mail address. [...] Flexpetz manages all logistics of the Canine Hotel Ambassador program, including hiring experienced, personable handlers as well as locating and training dogs that fit with the atmosphere of the property. The program is especially attractive to hotel operators looking to differentiate themselves from their competitors and is free and exclusive to hotel guests. Flexpetz is already planning the expansion of the Flexpetz Canine Ambassador Program into other hotel markets in early 2008.
According to the Itchmo report, ever since Brodie moved to the United States, he had been linked to pets or animals in his ventures and was shadowed by a history of failed ventures, lawsuits, unpaid bills, and fraud allegations. Brodie apparently characterized his past by saying “I’ve had some hits, some misses.” Brodie was appointed the CEO of Tetros, Inc. — a firm purchased by ColdStar Capital — on April 4, 2007. Flexpetz's press release n April 2007 described the company as a wholly owned subsidiary of Tetros, who were both owned by ColdStar Capital. ColdStar, listed its president as Jonathon Nicholson and was based out of the Cayman Islands. However, Brodie denied having any knowledge about ColdStar Capital until confronted with the SEC filing listing him as CEO of Tetros, Brodie. He declined to provide a phone number for Nicholson and the reference to ColdStar Capital was immediately removed from the Flexpetz website.
FlexPetz Holdings was owned by the Brodie company Asensia Inc. Its PR said that with an initiation fee of $200, as well as a standard monthly fee of $50 and required minimum rental of two visits per month at $29.99 on a weekday and $39.99 on a weekend, FlexPetz promotional releases said it was only for serious canine people. According to Business 2.0 Magazine, Marlena Cervantes (a former behavioural therapist) founded Flexpetz. Rental and registration fees were $120 per month and each dog arrived with its own bed, bowls, leash, chew toys, doggy waste bags, and prepackaged and premeasured dog food. Each dog carried an embedded chip with GPS and temperature sensors so Flexpetz can find it if it strays and make sure it's not too hot or too cold. The dogs are screened to determine how many humans they can handle, and when they aren't out on assignment, they spend their time in cage-free day-care centers. According to 9New.com, For an annual fee of $99.95, a monthly payment of $49.95 and a per-visit charge of $39.95 a day the dogswere from Cervantes' 10-dog crew of Afghan hounds, Labrador retrievers and Boston terriers. When Massachusetts was targeted by the pet rental service FlexPetz, State Representative Paul Frost penned a bill designed to prohibit pet rentals. “An Act Prohibiting the Renting of Pets” (H.D. 4864) would send a message to companies trying to exploit pets in novel ways and would also serve as a model for the USA as to how responsible stewardship for pets is best achieved — by rejecting such exploitive practices. Boston city council banned pet rentals. Under the proposal, any individual caught renting a dog would be fined $300 and the dog would be impounded. No one from FlexPetz attending the meeting, but in an interview with the Boston Herald, Cervantes said: ""We are a small company, and we just don't have the budget to fly out because the government is interfering in our business." ultimately pet rental was banned and an attempt to set up FlexPetz in the UK did not succeed.
A ColdStar Capital press release said: Mr. Simon Brodie, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer has over 20 years of international management, sales, marketing and trouble-shooting experience. He has managed divisions of multinational corporations and has guided startup companies from start-up through acquisition. Mr. Brodie has worked with organizations including United Kingdom’s National Health Service, Barclays Bank, HSBC, National Freight, Computer Sciences Corporation and JP Morgan. In 2004, he established companies to operate the new concept of high-priced domestic “lifestyle pets” which has resulted in worldwide acclaim for this new sector of the multi-billion dollar pet industry.
TETROS INC / COLDSTAR CAPITAL / ASENSIA INC
CEO With Sordid Past Behind Flexpetz Dog Sharing Service
Form 8-K Tetros Inc
SEC Report, Tetros Inc
Market Visual for Brodie
Address: Tetros, Inc. 1000 N. West Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801
ALLERCA / LIFESTYLE PETS
For full details about Allerca & Lifestyle Pets activities see The Murky Background of the Ashera and Allerca The most comprehensive study of this company as of 2007 is at Kerry Grens: Felis Enigmaticus. The Scientist. Jan 2007..
Allerca Article, The Scientist
Timeline: The Hypoallergenic Cat
Simon Brodie's Other Pet Projects
Slideshow: Reporter's Log on Allerca
The Scientific Evidence Behind Simon Brodie's Cats
Podcast: Suspicions develop over the authenticity of Allerca's hypoallergenic cat
Brodie said that he is not obligated to disclose his criminal record to potential Allerca franchisees or Allerca pet buyers. He said British press accounts about Cloudhoppers and his conviction “contain a number of inaccuracies,” but he acknowledged that he served “a sentence of under one year through a work-release program.” Allerca (i.e. Brodie himself!), issued a written statement to the San Diego times, saying the company is “fully aware of Mr. Brodie's personal history but that does not change the fact that Mr. Brodie has been instrumental in helping to create a product, a life, to help millions of allergy sufferers who always wanted to own a cat.”
In October 2004, Brodie incorporated Allerca in California, and issued a press release about the company's plans to genetically engineer allergen-free cats. Within two months, Colorado-based Transgenic Pets sued Allerca and Brodie for allegedly stealing its trade secrets and business plans. Transgenic Pets, founded in 2001, alleged that Brodie, then CEO of a company incorporated in Florida called Geneticas Life Sciences, had approached Transgenic earlier in 2004 about becoming an investor. In order to view Transgenic's business plans, Brodie signed a non-disclosure agreement, promising not to reveal confidential information, according to the Transgenic lawsuit. On Sept. 24, 2004, Brodie signed articles of incorporation to create Allerca, with Transgenic founder David Avner as its president, according to the lawsuit. Brodie also agreed to invest $2.5 million in the new company. The money did not materialise. On Oct. 12, 2004, Brodie e-mailed Avner that he and Geneticas would not participate, according to the lawsuit. Days later, Brodie incorporated Allerca in California and issued its news release. Transgenic sued Allerca and Brodie. Under terms of a settlement, Allerca had to shut down its web site and agree not to re-enter the market for genetically engineered, allergen-free cats until after May 31, 2006.
A California judge banned Brodie from developing and marketing cloned hypo-allergenic cats. Brodie had claimed that he would sell 200,000 cloned cats annually. In June 2006, Brodie's Allerca press relese claimed he had selectively bred hypo-allergenic cats using a natural mutation of the Fel d 1 gene. To give some context, in almost 10 years since 2006 Avner's research hasn't resulted in a hypo-allergenic cat breed.
In October 2006, the Sand Diego Union Tribune reported that San Diego-based Allerca (claiming to have hypoallergenic cats) was offering franchises at $45,000 a territory. Coverage by major news agencies including NBC, CBS and The New York Times meant business was so brisk Allerca had already filled its franchise quota. Allerca acted illegally in offering franchises in California because it prohibits the offer, never mind the sale, of a franchise until a franchise offering circular has been filed with and registered by the Department of Corporations. In spite of this, Allerca promoted franchises on its website and in emails to Californians without registering with the Department of Corporations. Allerca's claimed the promotions and emails only sought "expressions of interest" from potential business partners and that no payments would be accepted from potential franchisees in affected states until after official paperwork had been registered. The San Diego Union-Tribune contacted Allerca about its franchise marketing. The following day, Allerca changed its website (apparently following legal advice), removing a statement that it was "currently accepting expressions of interest for franchise territories available in the USA and internationally”, removing a “Franchise Program Interest” link giving contact information for interested franchisees and removing a statement that an Allerca representative would contact interested parties to further discuss the franchise programme. In spite of this apparent compliance with franchise laws, emails from Allerca and Brodie to prospective franchisees suggested the franchise programs were fairly advanced: the franchise in hypoallergenic cats was closed “due to high demand” and Allerca was “no longer accepting provisional applications.” Instead, Allerca/Lifestyle Pets was accepting applications for its upcoming Ashera franchise.
Allerca/Lifestyle pets marketed the Ashera (a re-branded F1 / F2 Savannah), the Allerca (hypo-allergenic) and Chakan (a re-branded Siamese). In 2008 they added the Jabari GD, a supposedly hypo-allergenic small dog (the photo depicts a brown cockerpoo-type dog). Brodie even contacted the White House when President Obama was looking for a hypo-allergenic pet dog. That could have been interesting!There was also the Titan Protector Ultra - a highly-trained German Shepherd dog for personal protection: "While the price may seem high, this is not usually an issue for our clients ... after all, what price can you put on your family's safety?". These highly intelligent dogs undergo two years of extensive and rigorous training in Germany with some of the world's best dog handlers. They are trained in odour detection and search and rescue as well being tested for strength, courage and endurance ... yet are perfect family pets. They are trained to track and trap intruders until the police arrive. Brodie's blurb claimed they were a hit in Japan and the Middle East within weeks of being launched. A standard Titan costs $89,151, while a a Titan Ultra (guaranteed to be traced back to champion German shepherd bloodlines) costs $128,758.
Asheras shiped to the Netherlands were proven by DNA testing to be Savannahs purchased under false pretences from a Savannah breeder. Allerca cats proved not to be hypoallergenic and were various breeds of shorthair, including Savannahs, rebranded as Allerca. The Lifestyle Pets/Allerca (faked) testimonial pictures suggest that the hypoallergenic mutation or genetic modification had been made in lots of cat breeds. Supposedly grateful owners (none of whome could be subsequently located) had sent in pictures of what are clearly Siamese, Abyssinian, Bombay, Burmese, Persian, Egyptian Mau, Bengal/Savannah and “domestic shorthair” cats. This would suggest that Allerca had done the impossible, accomplishing in less than two years a feat that is taking cat breeders more than a century to accomplish. This eventually resulted in investigation by the San Diego District Attorney, a class action and attention from the FBI since Brodie (who had become Simon Carradan) had defrauded people across the USA. The District Attorney was unable to locate Brodie/Carradan who had returned to England and had started new ventures baded in London (Recognitas, Vimentis, LP Global Ltd).
Summary of relevant information from Felis Enigmaticus, The Scientist, with added commentary based on information since that date.
San Diego was Allerca's HQ from 2004 to 2006. In July 2006, the San Diego Union-Tribune detailed Brodie's trail debt, broken contracts, and phantom products. Brodie told Kerry Grens of "The Scientist" that the report was full of inaccuracies, but wouldn't be specific. Steven May called the report "grossly inaccurate" but wouldn't say more because of "legal things going on". There are Court records in San Diego against Allerca. In February 2006 Allerca was sued in San Diego Superior Court for $3,297 in back rent for a loft space. Brodie's company Cyntegra was still registered to that according to the California Secretary of State Web site. A small claims court in Clairemont Mesa Boulevard had a note from a former Allerca employee asking for an extended date to serve Brodie a small-claims court suit for $4,600 in unpaid fees, because "[Brodie] seems to know that I am trying to serve him and he is avoiding me ... he must have done this before and is quite skilled at hiding." The avoidance techniques must have worked because the case was ultimately dismissed.
PRNewswire. LOS ANGELES, Nov. 15 (excerpted) ALLERCA, the lifestyle pet company that created the world's first hypoallergenic cat, announced today that Steven May has been appointed president. This new role, among other key management appointments, supports the company's strategic growth plans. "As ALLERCA enters its third year of operations, we are thrilled to have Steven May join the ALLERCA management team," said Chief Executive Officer Megan Young. "As a consultant to our company, Steven was instrumental in helping us launch the hypoallergenic cat and he's a natural fit to help us move the company forward." A Los Angeles native, May has a unique combination of businessexperiences to help ALLERCA with its fast growing expansion with more than 30 years of expertise in the veterinary companion pet industries. ALLERCA founder Simon Brodie has been appointed chairman and will continue to consult for ALLERCA to offer his expertise and guidance. Robert Stephenson, who has consulted for ALLERCA since the company's inception, has been appointed chief operations officer. As part of ALLERCA's strategic growth plans, the company has expanded and relocated its head office to Los Angeles, California and plans to open a satellite office in New York City, New York to provide sales and customer service support to a growing number of East Coast customers. CONTACT: Julie Chytrowsky
In October 2006, Steven May was Allerca's spokesman and its HQ was in San Diego although it was registered in Los Angeles. A press release in November 2006 announced that May would become president of Allerca, Brodie would become chairman, and Robert Stephenson would become chief operations officer. The headquarters would also move from San Diego to Los Angeles, and a satellite office would open in New York City. Shortly after the press release, Allerca moved its registered address from 11400 Olympic Avenue (a shared office leased to a number of companies to use for meetings and telephone answering services) to 10940 Wilshire Boulevard (also a shared office). Brodie's name was replaced on the registration by that of Megan Young, Allerca's CEO. Brodie claimed this was part of Allerca's ongoing growth, but former business partner David Avner (one of Brodie's victims) was convinced that Brodie's secretive behaviour was part of a fraudulent pattern. In 2007, Allerca claimed six full-time employees ran the company, but Steven May told Grens that up to 2,000 people could be working for Allerca at any given time. Most maintained the [non-existent] breeding facility, which Steven May admitted he hadn't visited or conducted [non-existent] research. In communications to others, Brodie also alluded to a "legal team". It seems the only real Allerca "staff" were Brodie, May, Stephenson and Young. For the Jan 2007 article, Kerry Grens interviewed then Allerca spokesman Steven May at a café near the University of California, Los Angeles and not at any of the company’s addresses. May claimed Allerca's details were kept confidential to protect staff from animal activists. Grens did not get to visit Allerca's scientific or cat-breeding facilities - for good reason - these did not exist, he simply resold cats. He attempted to buy Savannah females (proven breeders) under the alias Campbell Francis and his company as Monsenco Capital based in downtown San Diego (no such company listed on databases) while misrepresenting Allerca CEO Megan Young as a veterinarian.
A previous Brodie company, Geneticas Life Sciences, had promised to provide customers an allergy-free cat based on RNAi and had already accepted hundreds of nonrefundable $250 deposits. Geneticas had claimed it could bring the cost of cloning a cat below $10,000. The cats never came and the Geneticas name disappeared while Allerca appeared. In 2004 his plan was to genetically engineer such cats. Making an allergen-free cat was a goal of David Avner, an ER doctor at Sky Ridge Medical Center in Lone Tree, Colorado. During the 1990s Avner had worked in a lab at University of Virginia, where he came up with the idea for a genetically modified hypoallergenic cat. To launch his idea, he needed financial backing. Avner said that Simon Brodie contacted him to provide financial backing for Avner's lab. In 2004 Avner and Brodie agreed to set up a company called Allerca and start working on knocking out a gene for Fel d 1. Brodie pulled out of the deal. Avner said the within two weeks Brodie "basically took everything and claimed it was his own" including the business plans and marketing. Brodie then filed his own papers to create his own Allerca company with the same name and aims. Brodie incorporated Allerca in October 2004 in California. Avner took Brodie to court. The judge ruled in Avner's favor, and enjoined Brodie from developing and marketing Fel d 1 knockout cats until May 31, 2006. Suddenly, Brodie claimed to have found an easier way to produce hypoallergenic cats. One week after the injunction lifted, Allerca's press release claimed had selectively bred, not cloned, hypoallergenic cats. Avner continue to seek funding to launch his scientifically underpinned and peer-reviewed allergen-free cat research. He realised from the outset that Brodie's claims were a scam.
According to Brodie, Allerca's [unidentified and, it transpired, non-existent] scientists stumbled upon a family of hypoallergenic cats while testing out the company's newly developed genetic assay (Brodie declined to say how the assay was developed or what it was designed to detect - in fact it's another phantom product). The researchers were randomly screening cats across the country for the initial project to develop allergen-free cats using RNAi. They found cats that tested negatively for Fel d 1. Apparently additional work found the molecular weight of that protein was different in the mutant cats. Available images of the Western blot tests and DNA gels comparing Allerca cats to regular cats did not convince the scientific community. The images were of poor quality and were misleadingly labelled. They could not be trusted as supporting Allerca's claims.<./P>
Allerca hired Microbac, a commercial laboratory in Tennessee, to compare the Fel d 1 sequences between Allerca’s cats and regular cats. Robert Brooks, then Microbac's biotechnology laboratory manager, conducted the analysis in May, June, and July 2006. Allerca provided Brooks with cheek swabs from several adult cats and kittens. Brooks used the DNA to compare amino acid sequences between Allerca and control cats. He found several previously undocumented amino-acid differences in Fel d 1 between Allerca cats and control cats. Apparently all the Allerca cats had those, but he did not elaborate because the information was apparently proprietary. He did not link the differences to hypoallergenicity. Brodie claimed it was Allerca's researchers (not Microbac's) who discovered that the differences meant hypoallergenic cats. Allerca's team claim this trait was inherited by offspring, and began breeding the hypoallergenic cats. [In correspondence with a customer asking about neutering, he contradicted that claim by saying that breeding an Allerca cat to a regular cat would not pass on the alleged hypoallergenic trait. In a different communication he referred to neutering cats before delivery in order to protect his investment.]
Sheldon Spector, an allergist with the California Allergy and Asthma Group in Los Angeles, conducted Allerca's human exposure trial. He declined to be interviewed until after his second round of trials was complete. An Allerca spokesperson estimated this would not be until late November 2007 [a Brodie trademark - delaying tactics]. For his first trials Spector used three rooms, each randomly housing a hypoallergenic cat, a regular cat, or a stuffed animal. Volunteers who had been diagnosed with allergies entered the room blindfolded and reported their allergic responses. Spector found the hypoallergenic cats did not elicit an allergic response, though he has not published the results in a peer-reviewed journal. [Hence a District Attorney saying "a blindfold trial" is not the same as a "double blind" trial.]
Andy Saxon at the UCLA Medical Center said Spector's experiment was an unreliable predictor for hypoallergenicity. The conditions were uncontrolled. The amount of allergen a person was exposed to was uncontrolled and unmeasured. A person's response to the same amount of allergen could vary with each exposure as they became sensitised to it. Spector told The New York Times in October 2006 that he would not recommend people buy an Allerca cat, because the study was not definitive and people could still react to other parts of the Fel d 1 protein, or to other allergens that cats produce. Sensitization also plays a role. Fernando Martinez, director of the Arizona Respiratory Center said that people could be allergic to different parts of the protein (allergen). The oldest Allerca cats were just three years old and its possible that owner could become sensitised to their mutated protein through continued exposure. Leslie Lyons, at the UC-Davis School of Veterinary Medicine was sceptical of Allerca's claims. There were no peer reviews scientifically proving a hypoallergenic mutation althout it was theoretically possible. Martin Chapman, a former professor of Medicine and Microbiology at the University of Virginia and founder of Indoor Biotechnologies (they design allergy tests) said he had not come across any documented scientific study that the hypoallergenic cats were real. Hans Gronlund at the Karolinska Institutet Hospital in Stockholm and his colleagues showed that modifying the three-dimensional structure of Fel d 1 could reduce its IgE antibody-binding capacity, but said it would be impossible to speculate on what mutations or deletions created hypoallergenic cats.
Brodie told the media not to expect any peer-reviewed papers or patents on Allerca's discoveries in the same way that "Coca-Cola doesn’t publish its secret recipe" He claimed to have interested customers in 85 countries, and to protect the international market and keep the information on the cats mutation and their screening process proprietary. "We have something special here and we want to keep it confidential." His other reason was the regular death threats he claimed to receive from animal activists. Other scientists believed data hadn't been published because it didn't exist or it was falsified. They were proved right: no lab, no breeding facility and various cats, including Savannahs, bought from breeders (using the alias Campbell Francis) and sold on to his customers/victims as Allercas and Asheras. Allerca became Allerca/Lifestyle Pets and also promoted Asheras (rebranded, overpriced Savannah F1/F2 hybrids). All had to be paid in advance and it was almost impossible to get a refund when the company failed to deliver. Despite the glowing (and obviously fake) testimonials on the website, all Allerca’s customers got were excuses. As the number of victims grew, Allerca/Lifestyle Pets attracted more and more negative publicity, culminating in investigation by the District Attorney (who subpoenaed Allerca’s records, but later couldn’t find him in order to serve papers), by ABC news (the traced him to London in 2013) and by the FBI (since his scams were across state boundaries). Simon Brodie became Simon Carradan and switched from selling expensive non-existent cats to selling expensive equally non-existent skis.
TRANSGENIC PETS VS. ALLERCA OF CALIFORNIA (SUBMISSION OF CLAIM) & TRANSGENIC PETS VS. ALLERCA OF CALIFORNIA (TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING)
In the United Sttes District Court for the District of Colorado: Civil Action No.: 04-F-2572 (CBS)TRANSGENIC PETS, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company and DAVID AVNER, an Individual Plaintiffs, v.SIMON BRODIE, an Individual GENETICAS LIFE SCIENCES, INC., a Florida Corporation, and ALLERCA, INC., a California Corporation
Transgenic Pets, LLC (“Transgenic Pets” (TP)) and David Avner (collectively,“Plaintiffs”), submitted these claims against Defendants Simon Brodie, Geneticas Life Sciences, Inc. (“Geneticas”) and Allerca, Inc. (“Allerca of California”) (collectively, “Defendants”).
Transgenic Pets was a Colorado limited liability company based at Highlands Ranch, Colorado. Transgenic Pets engaged in the business of genetically modifying domesticated cats and other animals for sale. David Avner resided at Highlands Ranch, Colorado, and was the principal of Transgenic Pets.
Simon Brodie resided in Los Angeles, California. Geneticas was a Florida corporation based in Miami, Florida. As of October 1, 2004, Geneticas was an administratively dissolved corporation. Allerca was a California corporation based in Los Angeles, California. The Court had jurisdiction of the claims based on diversity of citizenship and the amount of controversy, which exceeded $75,000.00.
This is my summary of proceedings based on the published court papers.
Dr. Avner was a medical doctor who had spent years researching and perfecting the technology relating to the genetic engineering of cats. He had designed a genetically engineered hypo-allergenic cat that would greatly reduce or eliminate the common allergens produced by cats (“transgenic cats”). In 1996, 1999 and 2000, Avner filed patent applications (currently pending) covering his technology related to transgenic cats. To further his research and explore the business opportunities for transgenic cats, Dr. Avner formed Transgenic Pets, a Colorado limited liability company. He entered into a preliminary sponsored research agreement with an out-of-state university-based research lab which was willing to undertake the research andproduction of transgenic cats for Transgenic Pets.
Simon Brodie approached Avner and expressed interest in investing Avner's business. As a result, Avner entered into a Confidential Nondisclosure and Non-Use Agreement with Brodie and Geneticas in order to allow Brodie and Geneticas to evaluate Transgenic Pets' technology and trade secrets of Plaintiffs while at the same time protecting the technology and trade secrets from disclosure and use by Brodie and Geneticas. A copy of the Nondisclosure Agreement was presented as evidence in court. It defined the technology relating to a transgenic cat and the business plans, technical data, drawings, specifications, diagrams, research, demographicdata, reports, marketing concepts, any related narrative descriptions, figures and general information as proprietary trade secrets belonging to Transgenic Pets. Brodie and Geneticas agreed to hold the proprietary information and trade secrets in confidence and to use it only in the course of their work with Transgenic Pets. Brodie and Geneticas also agreed that for ten years from the date of the Nondisclosure Agreement, February 9, 2004, they would not use the proprietary information and trade secrets for any purpose other than in the course of their work with Transgenic Pets. Brodie and Geneticas agreed not to disclose any proprietary information or trade secrets to any person, firm, association or other entity for any reason whatsoever unless required to do so by judicial process. As part of that Nondisclosure Agreement, Brodie and Geneticas agreed they would not, directly or indirectly, enter into or in any manner take part in any business, profession or other endeavor which competed with Transgenic Pets. Brodie and Geneticas agreed not to compete with Transgenic Pets as an employee, agent, independent contractor, owner or otherwise. They also agreed that they would not, directly or indirectly,implement the technology, proprietary information or trade secrets for their own benefit or solicit, directly or indirectly, any person, company, firm or corporation who works or has worked in connection with Transgenic Pets during a period of eight years prior to the termination of the Nondisclosure Agreement. They agreed not to solicit such suppliers/customers on behalf of themselves or any other person, firm, company or corporation.
Following the the Nondisclosure Agreement, Avner provided Mr. Brodie with an electronic copy of his marketing plans, promotional literature and language, financial projections, potential customers and suppliers, sponsored research agreement, technology and trade secrets, including specific gene suppression processes covered by Avner’s patent applications, etc. In short, in order to convince Brodie to join the venture as an investor, Avner provided Brodie with a copy of the majority of the documents and information necessary to start the new venture. As part of the Nondisclosure Agreement, Brodie and Geneticas acknowledged that a breach of any provision regarding the nondisclosure and nonuse of theproprietary information and trade secrets would irreparably and continually damage Transgenic Pets and that an award of damages may not be adequate to remedy such harm. Accordingly, Brodie and Geneticas agreed that in the event of a breach or threatened breach of the Nondisclosure Agreement, Transgenic Pets would be entitled to a preliminary or permanent injunction to prevent the continuation of such harm.
After reviewing the technology, trade secrets and proprietary information, Brodie agreed to enter into and fund a corporation with Avner for the purposeof developing and producing hypo-allergenic companion pets, such as transgenic and cloned cats, and related businesses. The parties agreed to name the new corporation Allerca, Inc. On September 24, 2004, Mr. Brodie signed articles of incorporation, bylaws and an unanimous consent in lieu of an organizational meeting of Allerca, Inc. In these documents, he acknowledged that Allerca, Inc. was to be incorporated by Avner as a Colorado corporation, and that Avner would be the president and registered agent for Allerca. Brodie also agreed that Geneticas would be a shareholder in Allerca, Inc. for the sum of $2.5 million dollars to be paid in immediately available funds. Neither Brodie nor Geneticas ever paid any sums for the value of the common stock in Allerca, Inc. As a result, Avner never signed the articles of incorporation, bylaws or unanimous consent of Allerca, Inc. and never incorporated Allerca, Inc.
Around October 12, 2004, after more than six months of negotiations, Brodie emailed Avner and stated that he and Geneticas would not participate in the venture and that he acknowledged “our obligations under the confidentiality agreement.” Despite the requirements set out in the Nondisclosure Agreement, Brodie never returned the copies of Avner’s technology, trade secrets or other confidential and proprietary materials. On October 26, 2004,Brodie incorporated Allerca, Inc. as a California corporation (“Allerca of California”) and named a Sacramento-based company as the registered agent. He took these actions without the knowledge authority of Avner and named himself the President of Allerca of California. He represented to the public that he was the owner and originator and entitled to the transgenic cat technology and related patents. On or before October 28, 2004, his press release advertised the existence of Allerca of California and publicized Transgenic Pets' technology, trade secrets and proprietary information regarding transgenic cats. His press statement said that Allerca of California was accepting $350.00 deposits for the shorthairbreed of transgenic cats it planned to market for $3,000 to $10,000. In his press releases, Brodie also disclosed the specific gene suppression technology by which Transgenic Pets had planned to produce transgenic cats and which was covered by Avner's patent applications. The press releases were picked up by WebMD Medical News,CNN, and the Associated Press, among many others (shown as evidence in court). Brodie’s press releases advertising Allerca of California flooded the internet and papers with blatant disclosures of Transgenic Pets’ technology and trade secrets and attempted to solicit Plaintiffs’ rightful customers. In addition, Brodie disclosed, on Allerca of California’s website, verbatim language from Transgenic Pets' promotional literature and marketing plans.
Brodie also contacted Harlan Sprague Dawley of Madison, Wisconsin in order to purchase cats from that company for use in genetic engineering research. Brodie was aware that this company was a prior and current supplier to Transgenic Pets. He also contacted the out-of-state university-based research laboratory with whom Avner had entered into a sponsored research agreement for his research and production of transgenic cats. Brodie is attempted to usurp the Laboratory’sagreement with Avner. He did this despite his email, on or around October 12, 2004, stating that he would contact the Laboratory "to confirm that we are no longer progressing with TP [Transgenic Pets] on this project."
Through Allerca of California and/or Geneticas, Brodie improperly disclosed confidential and proprietary information, usurped Avner's property and competed with Avner in violation of the Nondisclosure Agreement. As a result, Transgnic pets were unable to attract another investor because it appeared (to the public) that Brodie had already “cornered the market” on that new technology. In reality, Allerca of California was based entirely upon the use and disclosure of Transgenic Pets' proprietary information in violation of the Nondisclosure Agreement. Brodie and Geneticas materially breached the Nondisclosure Agreement. Avner performed all conditions to be performed on their part under that Agreement, except for those excused by Mr. Brodie’s and Geneticas’ non-performance. Transgenic Pets suffered damages resulting from the breach of the Nondisclosure Agreement, including lost profits, customers, potential investors, and business goodwill, disclosure and misuse of proprietary information and trade secrets. Allerca of California falsely represented itself as the Allerca entity entitled to and able to design, produce and sell transgenic cats “using patented genetic technologies.” Allerca of California were passing off Avner’s technology, trade secrets aetc as their own with the intent to commit fraud and to harm Transgenic Pets. Avner's prospective clients entered into contracts and paid deposits for transgenic cats with Allerca of California. Transgeic Pets were irreparably harmed by the publication of their proprietary information and trade secrets.
TP had had prospective business relations with over one thousand customers who had emailed them with contact information and a request to purchase transgenic cats. Brodie had access to that information and solicited those customers. The damage to TP and its technology was irreparable and irrecoverable, but an Injunction would prevent further disclosure of information that rightfully belonged to TP. The injunction was eventually granted and Allerca of California claimed to be selectively breeding naturally hypoallergenic cats instead of cloning cats.
And a little more from Catfight over Allergy-Free Kitties (Amy Tsao, BusinessWeek Online, New York. Feb 2005.): On Dec. 14 , Transgenic Pets, based in Denver, filed a lawsuit against Los Angeles-based Allerca, alleging that the latter's chairman and CEO, Simon Brodie, violated nondisclosure agreements when his company began to advertise its plan to breed and sell hypoallergenic cats last fall. On Jan. 31, a federal district court judge in Colorado issued a 10-day restraining order against Allerca that orders the business to pull down its Web site, stop contact with investors, and cease collection of deposits from potential customers. "Our position is that he breached our noncompete agreement and is using our material to market his own company," says Avner. Brodie, who founded Allerca last year, declined to comment on the suit. "This isn't going to affect Allerca in the long term," Brodie says, adding that the hypoallergenic cat is just one project he plans to pursue. Those plans are expansive. Allerca issued a press release on Jan. 15, announcing that it will charge $5,000 for its future cats, instead of the $3,500 originally planned. "Tens of thousands" of people have sent refundable deposits, Brodie says, since he started marketing a few months ago. Sales could top $1 billion by the end of 2007, he estimates. [...] Brodie says researchers he has hired are currently testing the mechanism that silences the gene making Fel d1 in cat cells. He says Allerca will start implanting cat embryos by the fall. If all goes according to plan, kittens could be available by the end of this year or early in 2006. Brodie, who says he fared well as an information-technology consultant during the heyday of the dot-com economy [not true - more scams], funds Allerca himself.
Pets of the Future (Daily Telegraph, UK). Owned by former dotcom boomer Simon Brodie, [Lifestyle Pets] took advantage of science cracking the cat genome to produce the world's first hypoallergenic feline in just two years. Since then, the pace of new breed creation has accelerated. This Christmas, the company is offering a standard shorthaired cat from $6,000 (£2,940), a Siamese for $8-$12,000 (£3,920-£5,880), and the Ashera - a tiger-like cross between the African Serval and the Asian Leopard cat - for $28,000 (£13,700). "We've sold Asheras to Germany, Russia and China," [Untrue, the only Asheras shiopped abroad were to the Netherlands and they were seized under CITES laws] Brodie explains. "To spend $28,000 seems like a lot, but we've engineered the animals to be disease-free - cutting out vet bills - and if you add up the cost of allergy shots for the owner during the animal's life, we don't think it's very expensive."
Investigative Reporters and Editors entry for Allerca: "Allerca is a biotechnology firm in San Diego, which claimed to have engineered the world's first hypoallergenic cats. Though the cats recieved a lot of media attention, this investigation was the first to take a hard look at the company and its founder, Simon Brodie. The investigation uncovered a string of debts, umpaid employees, court judgements, and a fraudulent and illegal fake charity website. By Penni R. Crabtree; Jenna Zbik, San Diego Union-Tribune, 2006
Translated new article: A closer look at the man behind Allerca, its president and now consultant Simon Brodie, may slam pocket-books shut. Cat breeding is a new fancy for Brodie. According to reports in an English newspaper, the Argus, Brodie was living large in 1991 when he drove a Lamborghini. Cloudhoppers, a hot air balloon company that fell to earth in the small town of Uckfield , owing banks some £214,000. He rebounded five years later with a computer software company called Cybertech in the tiny Kensington are of London, but within a year, the venture went bust too, leaving a trail of consultants who sued for back salary. Then, in 1997, according to recent stories in the San Diego Union-Tribune, Brodie came to Toronto with his Integra Information Technology, charging $38,000 for a three-week software course. In 2004, he popped up in Los Angeles with ForeverPet, a division of his Geneticas Life Sciences, Inc., offering to clone cats for US $19,950. His other business ideas included NightSave deer-animals that would glow in the dark.
Brodie appears to be a person who can reinvent himself faster than Madonna, and leave cold biographical trail to boot. Googling through thousands of references to him on the Internet, few basic facts - and only two pictures-emerge. In one newspaper story, Brodie is identified as a Scottish "scientist" from Invernesshire. What is not on the Net: according to the Argus, in 1994, at the age of 31, Brodie was sentenced to 2.5 years in prison by the Hove Crown Court in east Sussex on seven counts of false accounting related to Cloudhoppers' fall. Amir Sheibany, now of Trans Union Credit and late of Cybertech, remembers his old boss well. "He seemed competent and energetic," Sheibany says. "Polished." Sheibany, 38, also remembers the lawsuit he and others filed against Brodie. We won a judgement of £ 35,000 pounds," he says," but we did not get any money. He said he never received any notification of the court case. "Then Shiebany says, he was gone.
As it turns out, Brodie did not need Avner's work. Through screening thousands of cats, he said, he made a lucky discovery: a few cats carried a dominant mutant gene that produced a modified protein less apt to create allergic reactions. Making the cats was a simple matter of breeding and then neutering the kittens to protect his investment. Avner says this discovery is theoretically possible, but the gene would be recessive and so rare that "the sheer numbers of cats required to find the one with it are astronomical." Nevertheless, Allerca is getting a lot of fawning media attention. Aside from two dissenting voices in San Diego-one a Union Tribune biotech reporter, the other John Mattes from fox 6 television-the cat storey has provoked a flurry of feel-good pieces in the New York Times, and on CBS, ABC and NBC. , where Allerca employees have all hugged the same white cat, a blue-eyed charmer named Joshua. Brodie was too busy to talk to Maclean's, according to his spokesperson Julie Chytrowsky. Says Mattes, who interviewed him last June, brandishing the Argus stories of his jail sentence, "Brodie did not want Avner's real science. He just wanted the terminology.
2008: Carradan Skis company address was 50 Meadow Village Drive in Big Sky, MT. The phone number listed on the website is (406)551-6060. According to records of FLEXPETZ HOLDINGS (filed by ASENSIA), COLDSTAR CAPITAL (filed by TETROS INC.) and other records filed with the SEC relating Simon Francis Brodie to FlexPetz/Asensia: Asensia Inc was registered to that address on 14th August 2007 and the phone number is (406)551-6061.
Domain Registered:February 19, 2008
Domain Expired:February 19, 2014
Registered 4 trademarks for skis: Diamondback, Envy, Mamba and Lust
Registered Address: Suite 209, 50 Meadow Village Drive 208, 161624, Big Sky, Montana 597161624
Not registered with the Montana Better Business Bureau.
The company website claimed "British skiing celebrity Martin Bell will personally fly to your destination and hand-deliver these skis" but on 22 November 2008, martinbell.com announced "Martin would like to announce that, as of this date, he no longer has any connection to Carradan Skis." Martin Bell cuts connection to Carradan Skis published 22/11/08
A member of the EpicSki forum emailed Carradan/Brodie for clarification.
June 28th, 2008: "Rumors are floating around the ski forums questioning if Simon Carradan of Carradan Skis is Simon Brodie of FlexPets and hypoallergenic cat background. Are you Simon Brodie, and if not, would you be willing to post your historical bio to the ski forums to show your background? With ski prices at $12k and $19k per pair, people want to see the background of the company's leader. We just want to bring the facts of ski companies to the masses."
June 28th, 2008: "We are involved in some legal issues regarding some of the spurious information that has been posted out there. I will talk with our attorneys to see what we can and can’t say at the moment, but they are formulating a response to these inquiries.. I am sure you understand. If you have seen any postings, I would appreciate you forwarding a link so that we can forward these to our legal team. In the meantime, rest assured that the skis are well into development and as promised, we will have the skis across to you by the beginning of the season. Regards Simon Carradan."
Needless to say there was no action because the information was (a) not spurious and (b) gave a researched history with sources. Nor was there any "legal team".
LP GLOBAL LIMITED (LP MONDIAL LTD)
Carradan is variously listed as Business Manager or Director (Genetics) of LP Global Ltd/LP Mondial Ltd from 19 June 2009 to 1 Feb 2011. According to published information, he resigned this post.
Incorporation Date 19 June 2009
Company was named Kessler Koss Limited, changed name to LP Global on 10 March 2010.
Changed Registered Office on 19th March 2010.
Previous registered address was 2nd Floor, 145-157 St John Street, London, EC1V 4PY
Last known Registered & Trading Address: First Floor, 2 Woodberry Grove, East Finchley, London, N12 0DR
The address 33 Conway Drive, Bognor Regis, England was also associated to LP Global Ltd according to company databases.
. Company status is dissolved.
Registered & Trading Address: 145-157 St John Street, London, EC1V 4PW
Incorporated: 24 Jan 2011
26 Jan 2011 - Carradan appointed to Board
18 June 2011 - Carradan left the Board, Mrs L Padro appointed to Board
29 June 2011 - Carradan (re)appointed to Board
4 September 2012 - Carradan resigned, company dissolved.
In 2009 Simon Carradan forms Vimentis Ltd. "VIMENTIS Brings the Wine Cork's Ritual and Romance to the Humble Screw Cap" Press release June 25, 2009 from VIMENTIS Ltd (via PRNewswire) by "Michael Thompson" who was allegedly the Vimentis PR man.:
"The VIMENTIS screw cap opener, was developed to replicate much of the cork's trademark ritual for screw-capped wines. The one-time use VIMENTIS device is designed to not only replicate the rotation of the traditional corkscrew but firmly embeds the cap within a viewing cylinder. The VIMENTIS is then placed on the dining table as a gift to the restaurant patron, much as a traditional cork is presented. In addition to providing a strong souvenir of the dinner and wine, the VIMENTIS contains printed information on the wine and winery and serves as a powerful marketing tool to encourage future retail-based sales. ... the cork is more than just a bottle closure. The cork is a souvenir of the wine, of the event, of the restaurant. ... A screw cap provides neither of these important ethereal functions and is the main obstacle facing wine makers looking to get their screw cap wines served at restaurants. Fortunately for all involved, VIMENTIS aims to change that for good and is an elegant, unique and valuable marketing tool that differentiates a wine in a very competitive marketplace. VIMENTIS Ltd is a London-based company established to develop innovative products for the beverage and restaurant industry. Priced at just a few cents each, wine makers include their custom-branded VIMENTIS with each case of wine. VIMENTIS works with all screw caps, including those from STELVIN(R) and GUALA(R). VIMENTIS Ltd is a London-based company established to develop innovative products for the beverage and restaurant industry. Further information on the company and its products can be found at [vimentis.com - defunct]."
I can't find any evidence that it did any business beyond this press release, but here is the registered company information:
Company number: 07099459 (now dissolved)
Company type: Private limited with share capital (no accounts filed)
Date of Incorporation: 9 December 2009
Share Capital: £1
Registered & Trading Address: Flat 3314, 1 Pan Peninsula Square, London, E14 9HL
11 December 2009 - New Company Secretary Mr S. Carradan appointed
11 December 2009 - New Board Member Mr S. Carradan appointed
Date of Dissolution: 31 May 2011.
It had one director at the time it closed. Its founding director was Mr Simon Carradan.
MORE LINKSDNA evidence proves that the Ashera is a Savannah cat