Preview
To: +15102671546 Page: 04 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
FILED BY FAX
ALAMEDA COUNTY
LUBNA K. JAHANGIRI (SBN 216736)
September 09, 2021
RACHEL Z. NORBY (SBN 326586)
JAHANGIRI LAW GROUP, APC CLERK OF
210 Porter Drive, Suite 230 THE SUPERIOR COURT
By Curtiyah Ganter, Deputy
ON
San Ramon, CA 94583
Telephone: (925) 574-0100 CASE NUMBER:
Facsimile: (925) 307-7086 RG21112597
ode
Attorney for Plaintiffs
HELEN MACATANGAY;
FEAI W. HAGHIGHI
“OD
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CS
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
we
JAHANGIRI LAW GROUP, APC
HELEN MACATANGAY, an individual; Case No.:
210 Porter Drive, Suite 230
FEAT W. HAGHIGHL an individual
OAZOD
COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs,
Fraud
(A
Negligent Misrepresentation
BeNe
VS.
Material Misrepresentation
Dawsnn
JOHN O’ REILLY, an individual: Joint and Several Liability of
ACCLAIM EDUCATION, INC., a Delaware Materially Assisting Persons
Joint and Several Liability of
corporation;
ja
Can
Management Principals or
HOOI HOON YEAP, an individual; and Materially Aiding Personnel
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive 6. Qualification Violation
7. Violation of Bus. & Prof. Code
Defendants. §17200, ef seq.
COME NOW Plaintiffs HELEN MACATANGAY, an individual, and FEAT W.
HAGHIGHI, an individual (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), who allege as follows against Defendants
JOHN O°’REILLY, an individual, ACCLAIM EDUCATION, INC., a Delaware corporation, and
HOOI HOON YEAP, an individual, and DOES 1- 10, inclusive:
PARTIES
L Plaintiff HELEN MACATANGAY (“MACATANGAY’) is and was, at all relevant
i
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 05 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 || times mentioned herein, an individual residing in the County of Alameda, State of California.
2. Plaintiff FEAT W. HAGHIGHI @HAGHIGHI”) is and was, at all relevant times
ON
mentioned herein, an individual residing in the County of Alameda, State of California.
3. On information and belief, Defendant JOHN O’REILLY (‘O’ REILLY”) is and was,
ode
at all relevant times mentioned herein, an individual residing in the County of Alameda, State of
California.
“ON
4, Defendant ACCLAIM EDUCATION, INC. (“ACCLAIM”) is and was, at all
relevant times mentioned herein, a Delaware corporation that, on information and belief, regularly
6S
conducts business in the State of California and County of Alameda. ACCLAIM was formerly
Ce
18 || known as The Coding Forum, Inc.
i1 5. Defendant HOO] HOON YEAP (“HOOT”) is and was, at all relevant times
12 || mentioned herein, an individual residing in the County of Alameda, State of California.
13 6. The true names and capacities of all Defendants are unknown to Plaintiffs and are,
14 || therefore, sued herein under the fictitious names of DOES 1 through 10, inclusive. Plaintiffs will
13 || amend this Complaint to allege such names and capacities at such time as they are ascertained. Each
16 || fictitiously named Defendant is responsible in some manner for the wrongful acts complained of
17 || herein.
18 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
19 7. Plaintiffs are California residents who bring this action as a result of Defendants’
20 || unlawful conduct, Venue is proper in this Court because a substantial part of the events giving rise
21 || to the claims herein occurred in the City of Hayward, County of Alameda. Therefore, this Court has
22 || personal jurisdiction over Defendants and venue is proper in this Alameda County Superior Court.
23 STATEMENT OF FACTS
24 8. In or around the fall of 2016, Plaintiffs were deceived into investing in a company
25 || called The Coding Forum, Inc-—later changed to ACCLAIM EDUCATION, INC. (hereinafter,
26 || “ACCLAIM”)—by grand promises from a group of individuals that gradually gained Plaintiffs’
27 || trust. By the time Plaintiffs became aware of Defendants’ scheme, Plaintiffs had already lost a total
28 || of more than $300,000.00.
2
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 06 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 9. Plaintiff MACATANGAY originally met Defendant HOO! while working as a
registered nurse in a convalescent hospital. They worked together for about six months.
ON
10. From around 2007 to 2013, Plaintiff HAGHIGHI worked at Advanced Pro Nursing
Institute, a school of nursing owned and operated by Defendant HOOL. Plaintiff HAGHIGHI worked
ode
there as an instructor for the Certified Nursing Assistant (“CNA”) program.
Li. On or around June 16, 2016, Defendant HOO! made a proposal to MACATANGAY
“ON
to partner with her and another person in opening a nursing university in California, with plans to
expand to Nevada. In the proposal, HOOI stated that Orilyn Roxas would be a business partner and
6S
the director of nursing because Ms. Roxas had experience running a nursing school in Concord.
Ce
10 12. In the same proposal, HOO! represented that she (HOOI) had been successfully
11 || running her own nursing school in Hayward for more than 10 years. She stated that the three of them
12 || should each invest around $250,000.00.
13 13. Following HAGHIGHI’s hiatus from teaching at the nursing school, during which
14 || time she pursued her Registered Nursing degree, Defendant HOO! approached HAGHIGHI in or
13 || around July 2016 about investing in The Coding Forum. HOOI knew that HAGHIGHI had recently
16 || finished her RN program and was in need of money.
17 14, Around the same time, in or around July 2016, HOO! also approached Defendant
18 | MACATANGAY once again about investing in The Coding Forum, HOOI represented. that The
19 || Coding Forum had been formed by HOOI and friends of hers from Stanford whom she had known
20 || for years. HOOI represented to MACATANGAY that The Coding Forum would be a lucrative
21 || business and that it would offer computer and coding classes as well as nursing informatics classes.
22 15. HOOI convinced MACATANGAY that HOO! had the background and experience
23 || to run a school and that with the help of her friends from Stanford, the business was sure to make a
24 || profit.
25 16, HOOI represented to both Plaintiffs that The Coding Forum was a very lucrative
26 || venture. She explained that The Coding Forum was a new kind of IT school focused on and
27 || specializing in nursing informatics. HOOL told Plaintiffs that within a couple of years The Coding
28 || Forum would be sold to a bigger entity, resulting in payouts for all of them. She promised Plaintiffs
3
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 07 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 || that they would receive millions from the venture.
17, HOOI further represented to Plaintiffs that she, herself, was investing a significant
ON
amount of money in the venture.
18. HOOI represented to Plaintiff HAGHIGHI that she wanted to include HAGHIGHI
ode
in the venture to help her make money, as she was aware that HAGHIGHI was a caregiver for three
people and really needed a sustainable income. Having known and worked for HOO! for a long
“ON
time, HAGHIGHI trusted her.
19, On or around August 16, 2016, MACATANGAY met with HOOT and JOHN
6S
O’REILLY. At this meeting, HOO] and O’REILLY further discussed what The Coding Forum
Ce
10 || would entail, including applications to the California Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education,
11 || instructors, proposed students, websites. At this time, MACATANGAY was also presented with
12 || O’REILLY’s portfolio, showing he was a Stanford-educated physicist. She, therefore, trusted that
13 || this was a reliable operation.
14 20. Based on HOOI’s and O’REILLY’s representations, Plaintiffs demonstrated some
15 || interest in investing. Therefore, in or around August 2016, Plaintiffs attended a meeting held by
16 || HOOL JOHN C. O'REILLY (“O’REILLY”), and Paul. These individuals held themselves out to be
17 || the founders of The Coding Forum.
18 21. At this meeting, O’REILLY reiterated HOOI’s promise that they would see a return
19 || on their investment and within two years the company would be sold to a larger entity for millions
20 || of dollars, and they would all reap the benefits. This confirmation of what HOOT had said further
21 || convinced Plaintiffs to invest in The Coding Forum. Defendants held themselves out to be
22 || competent and well-versed in running a company. Defendant HOOT, for example, had owned and
23 || operated Advanced Pro Nursing Institute for several years. O7REILLY’s background as a physicist
24 || would ensure that the school maintained the proper focus, with the right classes, etc., or so
25 || Defendants led Plaintiffs to believe.
26 22. Based on Defendants’ representations, Plaintiff Macatangay invested $250,000.00
27 || into The Coding Forum. MACATANGAY met O’REILLY and HOOI at building where Advanced
28 || Pro Nursing had been operating and gave a check for $250,000.00 to HOOL. O’ REILLY represented
4
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 08 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 |) that he had a lawyer who would be finalizing the paperwork and that the investors would then be
given stock certificates.
ON
23. Plaintiff HAGHIGHI, in or around August 2016, also invested $50,000.00 into The
Coding Forum. HOO! informed HAGHIGHI that this was a drop in the bucket. Shortly thereafter,
ode
O'REILLY pressured HAGHIGHI to invest an additional $5,000.00, saying he needed more funds
to help with operations and potentially get more A stocks.
“ON
24. On or around November 4, 2016, the attorneys supposedly finally completed the
investment documents.
6S
25, To date, neither plaintiff has seen any return on her investment, nor has either been
Ce
10 || informed on the status of her investment.
11 26. From August 2016 to December 2016, MACATANGAY helped to clean and update
12 || the building at which The Coding Forum would be, She cleaned all the ground-floor classrooms and
13 || offices, chose paint, sideboards, all materials for bathroom renovations, and appliances for the
14|/student breakroom. She met with the contractors to have the renovations executed.
15 || MACATANGAY spend days cleaning, as the site was very cluttered and unkempt. Plaintiff
16 || MACATANGAY later learned that at least $150,000.00 of her investment went to the building
17 || renovation.
18 27. On January 10, 2017, O’REILLY sent an email out, including to Plaintiffs, saying
19 || that The Coding Forum had been approved by the California Bureau of Private Postsecondary
20 || Education (“BPPE”), and was thus fully approved to operate in the state of California.
21 28. On April 8, 2017, OREILLY notified Plaintiffs that The Coding Forum had been
22 || approved as a Continuing Education Provider.
23 29. Despite O’REILLY’s representations, The Coding Forum had received no approval
24 || to operate by the BPPE or as a Continuing Education Provider, as Plaintiffs later discovered.
25 30. Asaresult, Plaintiffs believed that ACCLAIM would begin accepting students.
26 31. O'REILLY asked MACATANGAY in or around. June 2017 to become director of
27 || nursing at ACCLAIM, which she did. This was an unpaid position. She nevertheless performed all
28 || duties associated therewith, including helping to get the name of The Coding Forum changed to
5
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 09 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 | Acclaim Education, Inc. (hereinafter, “ACCLAIM”).
32. HAGHIGHI, meanwhile, was hired on as an independent contractor to teach a few
ON
classes. On or around October 11,2017, O7REILLY asked MACATANGAY to invest an additional
$25,000.00 in ACCLAIM. As no students had been enrolled in any of the classes, the money
ode
Plaintiffs had invested in August 2016 had decreased significantly.
33. In the fall of 2018, HAGHIGHI was teaching two classes at ACCLAIM. She was not
“ON
getting paid for one of them, however. When she complained to O’REILLY, he told her he was
having financial trouble and, further, was not required to pay her because she was an independent
6S
contractor.
Ce
10 34, In addition, one of the paychecks she received for the class she was getting paid for
11 || was from Pagemill, a separate company owned by O’REILLY.
2 35. HAGHIGHI eventually stopped. teaching one class due to nonpayment.
13 36. Despite not paying HAGHIGHI or other instructors, O’REILLY continued to take a
14 || salary from ACCLAIM, as did his daughter and wife. O’REILLY also charged ACCLAIM for
15 || conferences, hotels, meals, and flights.
16 37. In October 2018, HAGHIGHI and MACATANGAY attended a meeting in which
17 || they discovered that they had been defrauded. They learned that O’REILLY had no intention of
18 || giving Plaintiffs a return on their investment, that he had been funneling money between ACCLAIM
19 || and his company Pagemill, and that the school was not actually accredited.
20 38. Despite the lack of accreditation, OTREILLY had continued to enroll students in
21/)/ ACCLAIM and accept tuition money from them.
22 39. Plaintiffs further learned that HOOT had been obliged to surrender her nursing
23 || license in December 2017 as part of disciplinary action taken against her by the Board of Registered
24 | Nursing. Such action had been taken due to HOOI’s conducting a nursing program at Advanced Pro
25 || Nursing without it having been approved or accredited to offer such a program.
26 40. In or around May 2019, MACATANGAY found out that HOO! had placed the
27 || building in Hayward for sale.
28 Al. Following these revelations, Plaintiffs attempted to work things out with Defendants.
6
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 10 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 || Defendants refused to communicate with them, however. With no other recourse, therefore,
2 || Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit.
3 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
4 Fraud
5 (Against All Defendants)
6 42, Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference all allegations of this complaint and
7 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein.
8 43. To state a claim for intentional misrepresentation, Plaintiffs must show (1) a
9 || misrepresentation; (2) knowledge of falsity (or “scienter”); (3) intent to defraud, i.e., to induce
19 || reliance; (4) justifiable reliance; and (5) resulting damage.
11 44, In or around July and August 2016, Defendants represented that they were starting a
12 || nursing informatics school and needed investors. They held themselves out as capable founders,
13 || HOO! having successfully run Advanced Pro Nursing, and O’REILLY being a Stanford-educated
14 || physicist who knew how to develop the niche program they were going to offer at ACCLAIM. They
15 || further represented to Plaintiffs that they would receive a return on their investments, and that within
16 || a couple of years the schoo! would be sold to a larger entity, from which deal Plaintiffs would reap
17 || millions. HOOF also told Plaintiffs that she was investing as well. Defendants also represented that
18 || an attorney would handle Plaintiffs’ investment.
19 4s, Defendants knew, however, that their representations were false. HOOI, for one, had
20 /|/not run an accredited program at Advanced Pro Nursing since at least 2013, despite her
21 || advertisements to the contrary. She had never invested in ACCLAIM, nor did she intend to.
22 46, O’ REILLY had no intentions of operating a good program and within a few months
23 || would continue his lie by telling Plaintiffs that ACCLAIM (formerly, The Coding Forum) had been
24 || approved by the California BPPE.
25 AT, Defendants made these misrepresentations with the intent to induce reliance on
26 || Plaintiffs’ part, which reliance was induced. Plaintiffs had no reason to question Plaintiffs’
27 || representations, as Defendants had presented a business plan and portfolios and had held themselves
28 || out as successful in their respective endeavors.
7
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 11 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 Ag. Based on this reliance, Plaintiff HAGHIGHI invested $55,000 and Plaintiff
2 || MACATANGAY invested $250,000.00 in ACCLAIM (formerly, The Coding Forum).
3 49, Despite Defendants’ representations, Plaintiffs have never seen a return on their
4 || investment. ACCLAIM was never accredited and never sold to a larger entity. In fact, HOOL used
5 || $150,000.00 of Plaintiffs’ investment to renovate the building in which ACCLAIM held classes,
later putting the building up for sale.
“ON
50. Plaintiffs invested over $300,000.00 based on the misrepresentations of Defendants
and have been damaged thereby.
6S
Si. Alternatively, Defendant committed fraud by false promises. A false promise
Ce
19 || requires showing that 1) defendants made a promise to plaintiffs 2) without any intention to perform,
11 || 3) but made with intent to induce reliance, 4) causing plaintiffs to rely on the promise, 5) resulting
12 || in injury to plaintiffs.
13 52. As hereinabove alleged more fully, Defendants promised Plaintiffs millions in
14 || exchange for Plaintiffs’ investment in The Coding Forum (ACCLAIM). They nevertheless had no
15 || intention of fulfilling that promise, or to take any action that would lead to it being fulfilled. They
16 || made the promises they did in order to induce Plaintiffs’ reliance, which reliance was induced. Had
17 || Plaintiffs known the falsity of the promises made to them by Defendants, they would never have
18 || invested in ACCLAIM.
19 53. Defendants’ fraudulent conduct has caused Plaintiffs to suffer monetary damages,
20 || emotional distress, anger, frustration, and other damages according to proof at trial,
21 54, WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them,
22 | as hereinafter set forth
23 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
24 Negligent Misrepresentation
25 (Against All Defendants)
26 55. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference all allegations of this complaint and
27 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein.
28 56. Defendants’ conduct constitutes negligent misrepresentation. Negligent
8
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 12 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 | misrepresentation requires showing: (1) defendant made a representation, (2) without any
reasonable grounds for believing it to be true, (3) with the intent to induce the plaintiffs’ reliance,
ON
and (4) being unaware of the falsity of the representation, Plaintiffs acted in justifiable reliance on
the representation, and (5) sustained damages.
ode
57. Ashereinabove alleged, Defendants made multiple representations including, but not
limited to, the status and success of HOOI’s Advance Pro Nursing school, plans for the Coding
“ON
Forum, and about the return on investment that Plaintiffs would receive.
58. Defendants made all their representations, however, without any reasonable grounds
6S
for believing them to be true. Rather, Defendants made the representations they did in order to
Ce
19 || induce Plaintiffs’ reliance, which reliance was justifiably induced as explained above. As a result,
11 || Plaintiffs have sustained damages of more than $305,000.00.
2 59. Defendants’ fraudulent conduct has caused Plaintiffs to suffer monetary damages,
13 || emotional distress, anger, frustration, and other damages according to proof at trial.
14 60. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs prays for judgment against Defendants and each of them,
15 || as hereinafter set forth.
16 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
7 Material Misrepresentation
18 (Corp. Code §§ 25401, 25501]
19 [Against All Defendants |
20 61. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference ail allegations of this complaint and
21 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein.
22 62. In or around July and August 2016, Defendants, in Hayward, California, offered and
23 || sold to Plaintiffs shares in the stock of ACCLAIM (formerly The Coding Forum) for over
24 || $300,000.00, as alleged hereinabove.
25 63. That transaction was made by means of oral communications as alleged hereinabove,
26 || which included several untrue statements of material facts or omitted to state material facts
27 ||necessary in order to make the statements made in those communications, in the light of the
28 || circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The communications were untrue ass
9
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 13 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 | hereinabove alleged, including, but not limited to, the status and success of HOOI’s Advance Pro
2. || Nursing school, plans for the Coding Forum, and about the return on investment that Plaintiffs would
3 || receive.
4 64, As a result of the material misrepresentation, Plaintiffs suffered damages.
5 65. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs prays for judgment against Defendants and each of them,
6 || as hereinafter set forth.
7 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
8 Joint and Several Liability of Materially Assisting Persons
9 [Corp. Code §§ 25401, 25504.1]
10 (Against Defendants HOOI and O’REILLY)
11 66. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference all allegations of this complaint and
12 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein.
13 67. At the time of the acts alleged herein, Defendant HOO] materially assisted in
14 || defrauding Plaintiffs in that she convinced them to invest in The Coding Forum as described
15 || hereinabove.
16 68. Likewise, Defendant O’REILLY materially assisted in defrauding Plaintiffs by also
17 || convincing them to invest in The Coding Forum as described above.
18 69. Defendants HOOI and O’REILLY both acted with the intent to deceive and to
19 || defraud Plaintiffs.
20 70. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them,
21 || as hereinafter set forth.
22 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
23 Joint and Several Liability of Management Principals or Materially Aiding Personnel
24 [Corp. Code §§ 25501, 25504]
25 (Against Defendant O° REILLY)
26 7A. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference ail allegations of this complaint and
27 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein.
28 72. Defendant O'REILLY is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a managing
10
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 14 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 || principal of The Coding Forum (later, ACCLAIM), being its President. Defendant OREILLY made
2 || the offering of securities herein described on behalf of The Coding Forum.
3 73. As described hereinabove, Defendant O’REILLY defrauded Plaintiffs by materially
4 || misrepresenting facts in order to convince Plaintiffs to invest in The Coding Forum.
5 74, WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs prays for judgment against Defendants and each of them,
6 || as hereinafter set forth
7 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
8 Qualification Violation
9 [Corp. Code §25141]
10 (Against All Defendants)
11 75. Plaintiffs refer to and incerperate by reference all allegations of this complaint and
12 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein.
13 76. In or around August 2016, Defendants offered and sold to Plaintiff HAGHIGHI a
14 || total of 33,333 shares of Series A Preferred Stock of The Coding Forum, for which HAGHIGHI
15 || paid a total price of $50,000.00.
16 77. In or around August 2016, Defendants also offered and sold to Plaintiff
17 || MACATANGAY stock in The Coding Forum, for which MACATANGAY paid a total price of
18 |] $250,000.00.
19 78. These sales constituted an issuer transaction in that they were part of an initial
20 || offering of stock for capitalization purposes. Nevertheless, at the time of Plaintiffs’ acquisition, the
21 || sale was subject to qualification, was not exempt from qualification, and was not, and to date has
22 || not been, qualified as any kind of securities transaction with the Commissioner of Business
23 || Oversight.
24 79, Defendants are, therefore, liable to Plaintiffs for rescission.
25 80. In the event that Defendants no longer own the securities, they are liable to Plaintiffs
26 || for damages in lieu of rescission. The value of the securities at the time that Plaintiffs purchased
27 || them is to be determined.
28 81. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them,
li
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 15 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
1 || as hereinafter set forth.
2 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
3 Violation of Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq.
4 (Against All Defendants)
5 82. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference all allegations of this complaint and
6 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein.
7 83. Defendants’ conduct, as alleged above, constitutes unlawful, unfair, and/or
8 || fraudulent business practices, as defined in the California Business and Professions Code § 17200
9 || ef seq.
10 84. California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. borrows violations from
11 || other statutes and laws and makes them unlawful to engage in as a business practice. California
12 || Business and Professions Code § 17200 allegations are tethered to the following laws:
13 85. Defendants’ fraudulent conduct constitutes unfair and unlawful business practices in
14 || violation of California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq.
15 86. Plaintiffs have suffered real economic injury as a result of this unfair and unlawful
16 || conduct and stand to suffer future economic injury as a result.
17 87. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them,
18 || as hereinafter set forth.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs HELEN MACATANGAY and FEAL HAGHIGHI pray for
2 judgment and order against Defendants as follows:
23 1. That judgment is entered in Plaintiffs’ favor and against Defendants, and each of them for
an amount not less than $305,000.00 or according to proof;
24
2. For rescission of the purchase and restitution of $305,000.00 as original consideration paid
25 for the securities;
26 . . -
3. Pre- and post-judgment interest at the legal rate from August 2016;
27
4. For general damages in an amount according to proof;
28
5. For special damages in an amount according to proof;
12
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 16 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
6. For punitive damages;
7. For attorney fees;
ON
8. For costs of suit herein incurred;
ode
9. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
“ON
DATED: September 8, 2021 JAHANGIRI LAW GROUP, APC
6S
f
By: bade, on eee a
Ce
LUBNA KL.JAHANGIRI
Attorney for Defendants “
HELEN MACATANGAY;
FEAI W. HAGHIGHI
13
COMPLAINT
To: +15102671546 Page: 17 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group
SUM-100
SUMMONS FOR COURT USE ONLY
{SOLO PARA USC DE LA CORTE)
(CITACION JUDICIAL)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT:
{AVISO AL DEMANDADO):
JOHN O'REILLY, an individual;
**See Attachment
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF:
{LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE):
HELEN MACATANGAY, an individual:
FEAL W. HAGHIGHI, an individual
NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information
below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you ta file a written response at
Preview
To: +15102671546 Page: 04 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group FILED BY FAX ALAMEDA COUNTY LUBNA K. JAHANGIRI (SBN 216736) September 09, 2021 RACHEL Z. NORBY (SBN 326586) JAHANGIRI LAW GROUP, APC CLERK OF 210 Porter Drive, Suite 230 THE SUPERIOR COURT By Curtiyah Ganter, Deputy ON San Ramon, CA 94583 Telephone: (925) 574-0100 CASE NUMBER: Facsimile: (925) 307-7086 RG21112597 ode Attorney for Plaintiffs HELEN MACATANGAY; FEAI W. HAGHIGHI “OD SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CS COUNTY OF ALAMEDA we JAHANGIRI LAW GROUP, APC HELEN MACATANGAY, an individual; Case No.: 210 Porter Drive, Suite 230 FEAT W. HAGHIGHL an individual OAZOD COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, Fraud (A Negligent Misrepresentation BeNe VS. Material Misrepresentation Dawsnn JOHN O’ REILLY, an individual: Joint and Several Liability of ACCLAIM EDUCATION, INC., a Delaware Materially Assisting Persons Joint and Several Liability of corporation; ja Can Management Principals or HOOI HOON YEAP, an individual; and Materially Aiding Personnel DOES 1 through 10, inclusive 6. Qualification Violation 7. Violation of Bus. & Prof. Code Defendants. §17200, ef seq. COME NOW Plaintiffs HELEN MACATANGAY, an individual, and FEAT W. HAGHIGHI, an individual (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), who allege as follows against Defendants JOHN O°’REILLY, an individual, ACCLAIM EDUCATION, INC., a Delaware corporation, and HOOI HOON YEAP, an individual, and DOES 1- 10, inclusive: PARTIES L Plaintiff HELEN MACATANGAY (“MACATANGAY’) is and was, at all relevant i COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 05 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 || times mentioned herein, an individual residing in the County of Alameda, State of California. 2. Plaintiff FEAT W. HAGHIGHI @HAGHIGHI”) is and was, at all relevant times ON mentioned herein, an individual residing in the County of Alameda, State of California. 3. On information and belief, Defendant JOHN O’REILLY (‘O’ REILLY”) is and was, ode at all relevant times mentioned herein, an individual residing in the County of Alameda, State of California. “ON 4, Defendant ACCLAIM EDUCATION, INC. (“ACCLAIM”) is and was, at all relevant times mentioned herein, a Delaware corporation that, on information and belief, regularly 6S conducts business in the State of California and County of Alameda. ACCLAIM was formerly Ce 18 || known as The Coding Forum, Inc. i1 5. Defendant HOO] HOON YEAP (“HOOT”) is and was, at all relevant times 12 || mentioned herein, an individual residing in the County of Alameda, State of California. 13 6. The true names and capacities of all Defendants are unknown to Plaintiffs and are, 14 || therefore, sued herein under the fictitious names of DOES 1 through 10, inclusive. Plaintiffs will 13 || amend this Complaint to allege such names and capacities at such time as they are ascertained. Each 16 || fictitiously named Defendant is responsible in some manner for the wrongful acts complained of 17 || herein. 18 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 19 7. Plaintiffs are California residents who bring this action as a result of Defendants’ 20 || unlawful conduct, Venue is proper in this Court because a substantial part of the events giving rise 21 || to the claims herein occurred in the City of Hayward, County of Alameda. Therefore, this Court has 22 || personal jurisdiction over Defendants and venue is proper in this Alameda County Superior Court. 23 STATEMENT OF FACTS 24 8. In or around the fall of 2016, Plaintiffs were deceived into investing in a company 25 || called The Coding Forum, Inc-—later changed to ACCLAIM EDUCATION, INC. (hereinafter, 26 || “ACCLAIM”)—by grand promises from a group of individuals that gradually gained Plaintiffs’ 27 || trust. By the time Plaintiffs became aware of Defendants’ scheme, Plaintiffs had already lost a total 28 || of more than $300,000.00. 2 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 06 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 9. Plaintiff MACATANGAY originally met Defendant HOO! while working as a registered nurse in a convalescent hospital. They worked together for about six months. ON 10. From around 2007 to 2013, Plaintiff HAGHIGHI worked at Advanced Pro Nursing Institute, a school of nursing owned and operated by Defendant HOOL. Plaintiff HAGHIGHI worked ode there as an instructor for the Certified Nursing Assistant (“CNA”) program. Li. On or around June 16, 2016, Defendant HOO! made a proposal to MACATANGAY “ON to partner with her and another person in opening a nursing university in California, with plans to expand to Nevada. In the proposal, HOOI stated that Orilyn Roxas would be a business partner and 6S the director of nursing because Ms. Roxas had experience running a nursing school in Concord. Ce 10 12. In the same proposal, HOO! represented that she (HOOI) had been successfully 11 || running her own nursing school in Hayward for more than 10 years. She stated that the three of them 12 || should each invest around $250,000.00. 13 13. Following HAGHIGHI’s hiatus from teaching at the nursing school, during which 14 || time she pursued her Registered Nursing degree, Defendant HOO! approached HAGHIGHI in or 13 || around July 2016 about investing in The Coding Forum. HOOI knew that HAGHIGHI had recently 16 || finished her RN program and was in need of money. 17 14, Around the same time, in or around July 2016, HOO! also approached Defendant 18 | MACATANGAY once again about investing in The Coding Forum, HOOI represented. that The 19 || Coding Forum had been formed by HOOI and friends of hers from Stanford whom she had known 20 || for years. HOOI represented to MACATANGAY that The Coding Forum would be a lucrative 21 || business and that it would offer computer and coding classes as well as nursing informatics classes. 22 15. HOOI convinced MACATANGAY that HOO! had the background and experience 23 || to run a school and that with the help of her friends from Stanford, the business was sure to make a 24 || profit. 25 16, HOOI represented to both Plaintiffs that The Coding Forum was a very lucrative 26 || venture. She explained that The Coding Forum was a new kind of IT school focused on and 27 || specializing in nursing informatics. HOOL told Plaintiffs that within a couple of years The Coding 28 || Forum would be sold to a bigger entity, resulting in payouts for all of them. She promised Plaintiffs 3 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 07 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 || that they would receive millions from the venture. 17, HOOI further represented to Plaintiffs that she, herself, was investing a significant ON amount of money in the venture. 18. HOOI represented to Plaintiff HAGHIGHI that she wanted to include HAGHIGHI ode in the venture to help her make money, as she was aware that HAGHIGHI was a caregiver for three people and really needed a sustainable income. Having known and worked for HOO! for a long “ON time, HAGHIGHI trusted her. 19, On or around August 16, 2016, MACATANGAY met with HOOT and JOHN 6S O’REILLY. At this meeting, HOO] and O’REILLY further discussed what The Coding Forum Ce 10 || would entail, including applications to the California Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, 11 || instructors, proposed students, websites. At this time, MACATANGAY was also presented with 12 || O’REILLY’s portfolio, showing he was a Stanford-educated physicist. She, therefore, trusted that 13 || this was a reliable operation. 14 20. Based on HOOI’s and O’REILLY’s representations, Plaintiffs demonstrated some 15 || interest in investing. Therefore, in or around August 2016, Plaintiffs attended a meeting held by 16 || HOOL JOHN C. O'REILLY (“O’REILLY”), and Paul. These individuals held themselves out to be 17 || the founders of The Coding Forum. 18 21. At this meeting, O’REILLY reiterated HOOI’s promise that they would see a return 19 || on their investment and within two years the company would be sold to a larger entity for millions 20 || of dollars, and they would all reap the benefits. This confirmation of what HOOT had said further 21 || convinced Plaintiffs to invest in The Coding Forum. Defendants held themselves out to be 22 || competent and well-versed in running a company. Defendant HOOT, for example, had owned and 23 || operated Advanced Pro Nursing Institute for several years. O7REILLY’s background as a physicist 24 || would ensure that the school maintained the proper focus, with the right classes, etc., or so 25 || Defendants led Plaintiffs to believe. 26 22. Based on Defendants’ representations, Plaintiff Macatangay invested $250,000.00 27 || into The Coding Forum. MACATANGAY met O’REILLY and HOOI at building where Advanced 28 || Pro Nursing had been operating and gave a check for $250,000.00 to HOOL. O’ REILLY represented 4 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 08 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 |) that he had a lawyer who would be finalizing the paperwork and that the investors would then be given stock certificates. ON 23. Plaintiff HAGHIGHI, in or around August 2016, also invested $50,000.00 into The Coding Forum. HOO! informed HAGHIGHI that this was a drop in the bucket. Shortly thereafter, ode O'REILLY pressured HAGHIGHI to invest an additional $5,000.00, saying he needed more funds to help with operations and potentially get more A stocks. “ON 24. On or around November 4, 2016, the attorneys supposedly finally completed the investment documents. 6S 25, To date, neither plaintiff has seen any return on her investment, nor has either been Ce 10 || informed on the status of her investment. 11 26. From August 2016 to December 2016, MACATANGAY helped to clean and update 12 || the building at which The Coding Forum would be, She cleaned all the ground-floor classrooms and 13 || offices, chose paint, sideboards, all materials for bathroom renovations, and appliances for the 14|/student breakroom. She met with the contractors to have the renovations executed. 15 || MACATANGAY spend days cleaning, as the site was very cluttered and unkempt. Plaintiff 16 || MACATANGAY later learned that at least $150,000.00 of her investment went to the building 17 || renovation. 18 27. On January 10, 2017, O’REILLY sent an email out, including to Plaintiffs, saying 19 || that The Coding Forum had been approved by the California Bureau of Private Postsecondary 20 || Education (“BPPE”), and was thus fully approved to operate in the state of California. 21 28. On April 8, 2017, OREILLY notified Plaintiffs that The Coding Forum had been 22 || approved as a Continuing Education Provider. 23 29. Despite O’REILLY’s representations, The Coding Forum had received no approval 24 || to operate by the BPPE or as a Continuing Education Provider, as Plaintiffs later discovered. 25 30. Asaresult, Plaintiffs believed that ACCLAIM would begin accepting students. 26 31. O'REILLY asked MACATANGAY in or around. June 2017 to become director of 27 || nursing at ACCLAIM, which she did. This was an unpaid position. She nevertheless performed all 28 || duties associated therewith, including helping to get the name of The Coding Forum changed to 5 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 09 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 | Acclaim Education, Inc. (hereinafter, “ACCLAIM”). 32. HAGHIGHI, meanwhile, was hired on as an independent contractor to teach a few ON classes. On or around October 11,2017, O7REILLY asked MACATANGAY to invest an additional $25,000.00 in ACCLAIM. As no students had been enrolled in any of the classes, the money ode Plaintiffs had invested in August 2016 had decreased significantly. 33. In the fall of 2018, HAGHIGHI was teaching two classes at ACCLAIM. She was not “ON getting paid for one of them, however. When she complained to O’REILLY, he told her he was having financial trouble and, further, was not required to pay her because she was an independent 6S contractor. Ce 10 34, In addition, one of the paychecks she received for the class she was getting paid for 11 || was from Pagemill, a separate company owned by O’REILLY. 2 35. HAGHIGHI eventually stopped. teaching one class due to nonpayment. 13 36. Despite not paying HAGHIGHI or other instructors, O’REILLY continued to take a 14 || salary from ACCLAIM, as did his daughter and wife. O’REILLY also charged ACCLAIM for 15 || conferences, hotels, meals, and flights. 16 37. In October 2018, HAGHIGHI and MACATANGAY attended a meeting in which 17 || they discovered that they had been defrauded. They learned that O’REILLY had no intention of 18 || giving Plaintiffs a return on their investment, that he had been funneling money between ACCLAIM 19 || and his company Pagemill, and that the school was not actually accredited. 20 38. Despite the lack of accreditation, OTREILLY had continued to enroll students in 21/)/ ACCLAIM and accept tuition money from them. 22 39. Plaintiffs further learned that HOOT had been obliged to surrender her nursing 23 || license in December 2017 as part of disciplinary action taken against her by the Board of Registered 24 | Nursing. Such action had been taken due to HOOI’s conducting a nursing program at Advanced Pro 25 || Nursing without it having been approved or accredited to offer such a program. 26 40. In or around May 2019, MACATANGAY found out that HOO! had placed the 27 || building in Hayward for sale. 28 Al. Following these revelations, Plaintiffs attempted to work things out with Defendants. 6 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 10 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 || Defendants refused to communicate with them, however. With no other recourse, therefore, 2 || Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit. 3 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 4 Fraud 5 (Against All Defendants) 6 42, Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference all allegations of this complaint and 7 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein. 8 43. To state a claim for intentional misrepresentation, Plaintiffs must show (1) a 9 || misrepresentation; (2) knowledge of falsity (or “scienter”); (3) intent to defraud, i.e., to induce 19 || reliance; (4) justifiable reliance; and (5) resulting damage. 11 44, In or around July and August 2016, Defendants represented that they were starting a 12 || nursing informatics school and needed investors. They held themselves out as capable founders, 13 || HOO! having successfully run Advanced Pro Nursing, and O’REILLY being a Stanford-educated 14 || physicist who knew how to develop the niche program they were going to offer at ACCLAIM. They 15 || further represented to Plaintiffs that they would receive a return on their investments, and that within 16 || a couple of years the schoo! would be sold to a larger entity, from which deal Plaintiffs would reap 17 || millions. HOOF also told Plaintiffs that she was investing as well. Defendants also represented that 18 || an attorney would handle Plaintiffs’ investment. 19 4s, Defendants knew, however, that their representations were false. HOOI, for one, had 20 /|/not run an accredited program at Advanced Pro Nursing since at least 2013, despite her 21 || advertisements to the contrary. She had never invested in ACCLAIM, nor did she intend to. 22 46, O’ REILLY had no intentions of operating a good program and within a few months 23 || would continue his lie by telling Plaintiffs that ACCLAIM (formerly, The Coding Forum) had been 24 || approved by the California BPPE. 25 AT, Defendants made these misrepresentations with the intent to induce reliance on 26 || Plaintiffs’ part, which reliance was induced. Plaintiffs had no reason to question Plaintiffs’ 27 || representations, as Defendants had presented a business plan and portfolios and had held themselves 28 || out as successful in their respective endeavors. 7 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 11 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 Ag. Based on this reliance, Plaintiff HAGHIGHI invested $55,000 and Plaintiff 2 || MACATANGAY invested $250,000.00 in ACCLAIM (formerly, The Coding Forum). 3 49, Despite Defendants’ representations, Plaintiffs have never seen a return on their 4 || investment. ACCLAIM was never accredited and never sold to a larger entity. In fact, HOOL used 5 || $150,000.00 of Plaintiffs’ investment to renovate the building in which ACCLAIM held classes, later putting the building up for sale. “ON 50. Plaintiffs invested over $300,000.00 based on the misrepresentations of Defendants and have been damaged thereby. 6S Si. Alternatively, Defendant committed fraud by false promises. A false promise Ce 19 || requires showing that 1) defendants made a promise to plaintiffs 2) without any intention to perform, 11 || 3) but made with intent to induce reliance, 4) causing plaintiffs to rely on the promise, 5) resulting 12 || in injury to plaintiffs. 13 52. As hereinabove alleged more fully, Defendants promised Plaintiffs millions in 14 || exchange for Plaintiffs’ investment in The Coding Forum (ACCLAIM). They nevertheless had no 15 || intention of fulfilling that promise, or to take any action that would lead to it being fulfilled. They 16 || made the promises they did in order to induce Plaintiffs’ reliance, which reliance was induced. Had 17 || Plaintiffs known the falsity of the promises made to them by Defendants, they would never have 18 || invested in ACCLAIM. 19 53. Defendants’ fraudulent conduct has caused Plaintiffs to suffer monetary damages, 20 || emotional distress, anger, frustration, and other damages according to proof at trial, 21 54, WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them, 22 | as hereinafter set forth 23 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 24 Negligent Misrepresentation 25 (Against All Defendants) 26 55. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference all allegations of this complaint and 27 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein. 28 56. Defendants’ conduct constitutes negligent misrepresentation. Negligent 8 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 12 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 | misrepresentation requires showing: (1) defendant made a representation, (2) without any reasonable grounds for believing it to be true, (3) with the intent to induce the plaintiffs’ reliance, ON and (4) being unaware of the falsity of the representation, Plaintiffs acted in justifiable reliance on the representation, and (5) sustained damages. ode 57. Ashereinabove alleged, Defendants made multiple representations including, but not limited to, the status and success of HOOI’s Advance Pro Nursing school, plans for the Coding “ON Forum, and about the return on investment that Plaintiffs would receive. 58. Defendants made all their representations, however, without any reasonable grounds 6S for believing them to be true. Rather, Defendants made the representations they did in order to Ce 19 || induce Plaintiffs’ reliance, which reliance was justifiably induced as explained above. As a result, 11 || Plaintiffs have sustained damages of more than $305,000.00. 2 59. Defendants’ fraudulent conduct has caused Plaintiffs to suffer monetary damages, 13 || emotional distress, anger, frustration, and other damages according to proof at trial. 14 60. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs prays for judgment against Defendants and each of them, 15 || as hereinafter set forth. 16 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 7 Material Misrepresentation 18 (Corp. Code §§ 25401, 25501] 19 [Against All Defendants | 20 61. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference ail allegations of this complaint and 21 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein. 22 62. In or around July and August 2016, Defendants, in Hayward, California, offered and 23 || sold to Plaintiffs shares in the stock of ACCLAIM (formerly The Coding Forum) for over 24 || $300,000.00, as alleged hereinabove. 25 63. That transaction was made by means of oral communications as alleged hereinabove, 26 || which included several untrue statements of material facts or omitted to state material facts 27 ||necessary in order to make the statements made in those communications, in the light of the 28 || circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. The communications were untrue ass 9 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 13 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 | hereinabove alleged, including, but not limited to, the status and success of HOOI’s Advance Pro 2. || Nursing school, plans for the Coding Forum, and about the return on investment that Plaintiffs would 3 || receive. 4 64, As a result of the material misrepresentation, Plaintiffs suffered damages. 5 65. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs prays for judgment against Defendants and each of them, 6 || as hereinafter set forth. 7 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 8 Joint and Several Liability of Materially Assisting Persons 9 [Corp. Code §§ 25401, 25504.1] 10 (Against Defendants HOOI and O’REILLY) 11 66. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference all allegations of this complaint and 12 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein. 13 67. At the time of the acts alleged herein, Defendant HOO] materially assisted in 14 || defrauding Plaintiffs in that she convinced them to invest in The Coding Forum as described 15 || hereinabove. 16 68. Likewise, Defendant O’REILLY materially assisted in defrauding Plaintiffs by also 17 || convincing them to invest in The Coding Forum as described above. 18 69. Defendants HOOI and O’REILLY both acted with the intent to deceive and to 19 || defraud Plaintiffs. 20 70. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them, 21 || as hereinafter set forth. 22 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 23 Joint and Several Liability of Management Principals or Materially Aiding Personnel 24 [Corp. Code §§ 25501, 25504] 25 (Against Defendant O° REILLY) 26 7A. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference ail allegations of this complaint and 27 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein. 28 72. Defendant O'REILLY is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a managing 10 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 14 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 || principal of The Coding Forum (later, ACCLAIM), being its President. Defendant OREILLY made 2 || the offering of securities herein described on behalf of The Coding Forum. 3 73. As described hereinabove, Defendant O’REILLY defrauded Plaintiffs by materially 4 || misrepresenting facts in order to convince Plaintiffs to invest in The Coding Forum. 5 74, WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs prays for judgment against Defendants and each of them, 6 || as hereinafter set forth 7 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 8 Qualification Violation 9 [Corp. Code §25141] 10 (Against All Defendants) 11 75. Plaintiffs refer to and incerperate by reference all allegations of this complaint and 12 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein. 13 76. In or around August 2016, Defendants offered and sold to Plaintiff HAGHIGHI a 14 || total of 33,333 shares of Series A Preferred Stock of The Coding Forum, for which HAGHIGHI 15 || paid a total price of $50,000.00. 16 77. In or around August 2016, Defendants also offered and sold to Plaintiff 17 || MACATANGAY stock in The Coding Forum, for which MACATANGAY paid a total price of 18 |] $250,000.00. 19 78. These sales constituted an issuer transaction in that they were part of an initial 20 || offering of stock for capitalization purposes. Nevertheless, at the time of Plaintiffs’ acquisition, the 21 || sale was subject to qualification, was not exempt from qualification, and was not, and to date has 22 || not been, qualified as any kind of securities transaction with the Commissioner of Business 23 || Oversight. 24 79, Defendants are, therefore, liable to Plaintiffs for rescission. 25 80. In the event that Defendants no longer own the securities, they are liable to Plaintiffs 26 || for damages in lieu of rescission. The value of the securities at the time that Plaintiffs purchased 27 || them is to be determined. 28 81. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them, li COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 15 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 1 || as hereinafter set forth. 2 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION 3 Violation of Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200, et seq. 4 (Against All Defendants) 5 82. Plaintiffs refer to and incorporate by reference all allegations of this complaint and 6 || re-allege them as though fully set forth herein. 7 83. Defendants’ conduct, as alleged above, constitutes unlawful, unfair, and/or 8 || fraudulent business practices, as defined in the California Business and Professions Code § 17200 9 || ef seq. 10 84. California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. borrows violations from 11 || other statutes and laws and makes them unlawful to engage in as a business practice. California 12 || Business and Professions Code § 17200 allegations are tethered to the following laws: 13 85. Defendants’ fraudulent conduct constitutes unfair and unlawful business practices in 14 || violation of California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. 15 86. Plaintiffs have suffered real economic injury as a result of this unfair and unlawful 16 || conduct and stand to suffer future economic injury as a result. 17 87. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants and each of them, 18 || as hereinafter set forth. PRAYER WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs HELEN MACATANGAY and FEAL HAGHIGHI pray for 2 judgment and order against Defendants as follows: 23 1. That judgment is entered in Plaintiffs’ favor and against Defendants, and each of them for an amount not less than $305,000.00 or according to proof; 24 2. For rescission of the purchase and restitution of $305,000.00 as original consideration paid 25 for the securities; 26 . . - 3. Pre- and post-judgment interest at the legal rate from August 2016; 27 4. For general damages in an amount according to proof; 28 5. For special damages in an amount according to proof; 12 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 16 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group 6. For punitive damages; 7. For attorney fees; ON 8. For costs of suit herein incurred; ode 9. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. “ON DATED: September 8, 2021 JAHANGIRI LAW GROUP, APC 6S f By: bade, on eee a Ce LUBNA KL.JAHANGIRI Attorney for Defendants “ HELEN MACATANGAY; FEAI W. HAGHIGHI 13 COMPLAINT To: +15102671546 Page: 17 of 18 2021-09-08 23:54:13 GMT 19253077086 From: Jahangiri Law Group SUM-100 SUMMONS FOR COURT USE ONLY {SOLO PARA USC DE LA CORTE) (CITACION JUDICIAL) NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: {AVISO AL DEMANDADO): JOHN O'REILLY, an individual; **See Attachment YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: {LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): HELEN MACATANGAY, an individual: FEAL W. HAGHIGHI, an individual NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information below. You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you ta file a written response at