affirmation in support of motions (1)to intervene … · is not technically necessary since only...

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------------------- x : OPPENHEIMER & CO. INC., : Case No.: 12-CV-9311 (LAK) :

Plaintiff, : AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT : OF MOTIONS (1)TO INTERVENE -against- : (2)TO ASSUME SELF REPRESENTATION, : (3) TO AMEND COMPLAINT, (4) TO

: APPOINT COUNSEL TO DEFENDANT(S), PIMJO TRUST CV, XAVIER TRUST, in its capacity as : (5) TO APPOINT COUNSEL TO LUIS- Trustee for Pimjo Trust CV, JOSEPH TRUST, in its : ALEJANDRO AGUILAR-PARDO, (6) TO capacity as Trustee for Pimjo Trust CV, and CARISMA : ADMONISH COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF, PRIMA LIMITED, in its capacity as the Trustee for the : (7) TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF TO OBEY Xavier Trust and the Joseph Trust, : INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED TO PROTECT : THE ACCOUNT AND (8) TO REQUEST Defendants. : EXTENSION OF TIME. -------------------------------------------------------------------x

I, Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo, affirm under the penalty of perjury that:

1. I, Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo, am the Sole Director and Managing Director of Carisma Prima Limited and Attorney-in-Fact of Pimjo Trust CV, apparently one of the defendants in the above mentioned action, and respectfully move this Court to issue / approve the following orders / requests:

2. the intervention of Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo in this trial pursuant to Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

3. the exercise of the right of Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo to self-representation or pro se legal representation as contemplated in 28 U.S.C. § 1654 in order to advocate on his own behalf before this Court with the sole purpose of defending indirectly the rights of defendant Carisma Prima Limited and its underlying entities which are defenseless and are being abusively defrauded by Plaintiff,

4. the order to Plaintiff to amend the complaint since it is plagued with many and determinant mistakes aside of being drafted with bias against Defendants as fully explain below. Without detriment to the other mistakes explained infra, the very same determination of the defendant(s) is wrong since the Xavier Trust and the Joseph Trust are not trustees for Pimjo Trust CV nor Pimjo Trust CV is a trust (even though it bears the word “Trust” in its title) and thus the proper designation of the defendant(s) following the style of Plaintiff should be PIMJO TRUST CV, XAVIER TRUST, in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, JOSEPH TRUST, in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, and CARISMA PRIMA LIMITED, in its capacity for the Xavier Trust and the Joseph Trust. Actually, the technical description of defendant should be Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, originally a Dutch Civil Law (Continental Law) limited partnership[, and as Trustee for the Xavier Trust acting in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV]. The text enclosed in brackets

1

is not technically necessary since only the General / Managing Partner may represent Pimjo Trust CV.

5. the appointment of Sullivan & Cromwell, New York, 125 Broad Street, New York, NY 10004, as counsel and attorneys for defendant(s) Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, originally a Dutch Civil Law (Continental Law) limited partnership[, and as Trustee for the Xavier Trust acting in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV] together with the order to Plaintiff Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to cover from the funds existing in the Account1 blocked by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. the fees and expenses incurred by defendant(s) in its (their) defense against Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and others,

6. the appointment of counsel for Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo since it is my sincere belief that the real facts neither mentioned to, nor ventilated in, this Court might derive this cause from the civil jurisdiction to the criminal jurisdiction,

7. to warn counsel for Plaintiff to be accurate with the facts and to request counsel for Plaintiff that notices should be processed with adequate and sufficient time being that it was the case that the email from Mr. Michael Gibson giving me notice about the conference held on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 was sent by counsel for Plaintiff to me at 18:16 EST of Friday, January 18, 2013, after the close of business, and at the beginning of a long weekend since Monday, January 21, 2013 was a federal holiday (Martin Luther King Day) even though counsel for Plaintiff has refused to acknowledge when was he aware of the invitation of the Court but there is an email that might suggest that counsel for Plaintiff was aware of the invitation of the Court as early as Wednesday, January 16, 2013,

8. to compel Plaintiff Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to obey and execute the instructions duly communicated and the absence of compliance of which are placing unjustified risks on the assets of Pimjo Trust CV deposited at Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. not even borne or assumed by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.’s clients in Venezuela, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.,’s Caracas Branch Manager John Gayle Pettus Jaso, Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo for their own personal assets.

9. to request an extension of time for the deadline set for February 5, 2013 in order to allow that Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, originally a Dutch Civil Law (Continental Law) limited partnership, and as Trustee for the Xavier Trust acting in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV complete the conversion of Pimjo Trust CV from a foreign entity into a Florida Limited Liability Company thus securing federal jurisdiction for the Court over this case.

10. In order to understand this case, it is necessary to explain two essential elements to apprehend the status quo. One is the correct structure of the entities and its links with the persons which not even Plaintiff understands yet after more than a year and the other is the point of inflection of the immediate conflict and the difference with the whole conflict.

11. The structure is depicted as follows:

1 As this term is used by Plaintiff in its complaint.

2

Carisma Prima Limited.New Zealand

# 211154631-Mar-2008

IRD 99387084GST cancelled

FEIN 98-0632390

XavierTrust

27 -June -2001.

FEIN 98-6065856

Directors :Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo.

100

To be determined in accordance with Plan of

Revitalization

Alternate Benficiaries

Beneficiary

JosephTrust

07 -July – 2009.

FEIN 98-6065855

Address:Aguilar & Aguilar Limited

Level 31, Vero Centre48 Shortland Street

Auckland 1140, New ZealandTel. +64-9-363.3391Fax +64-9-358.7340

Pimjo Trust CV

July 19, 2001

R. July 7, 2009The

Netherlands.FEIN 98-1035735

99.9999%LimitedPartner

Aguilar & Aguilar Limited.New Zealand

# 207809316-Jan-2008

IRD 98800603GST cancelled

FEIN 98-0632391

PortafolioOppenheimer

Account number A14-0505833-

452.

0.0001%GeneralPartner







Directors :Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo.Carlos Ignacio Aguilar LopezAdriana Vollmer de Marcellus

Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo

Attorneys- in Fact :Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo.Carlos Ignacio Aguilar LopezAdriana Vollmer de Marcellus

Power of Attorney dated January 23, 2012


Revitalization


Beneficiary


Revitalization


Deed of Nomination and Acknowledgement of Beneficial Interest

Checking Account UMB

Bank NAOppenheimer

Account number 26201338505041

12. The basic structure has been the same since July 7, 2009. 13. From top to bottom and from left to right, the explanation is the following: 14. Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo is a Venezuelan citizen, resident of the United States of America,

lawyer empowered to take all decisions concerning legal matters. Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo is the sole shareholder of Aguilar & Aguilar Limited, a New Zealand company.

15. The directors of Aguilar & Aguilar Limited are Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo, Carlos Ignacio Aguilar López and Adriana Vollmer de Marcellus, all Venezuelan lawyers.

16. In accordance with a Deed of Nomination and Acknowledgement of Beneficial Interest, Aguilar & Aguilar Limited is the sole shareholder of Carisma Prima Limited holding the shares of such company in a fiduciary capacity for the benefit of such person as finally determined in accordance with the Plan of Revitalization dated January 17, 2012 or for the Alternate Beneficiaries if it is finally

3

determined that the Plan of Revitalization dated January 17, 2012 may not be carried out. The Alternate Beneficiaries are all charitable institutions that had been named as universal heirs of the deceased Josef Grootkerk Zeldenrust in his last will immediately before to the last.

17. Carisma Prima Limited is the trustee of two New Zealand foreign resident trusts: The Xavier Trust and The Joseph Trust. Both trusts were settled by non-resident New Zealand persons. The beneficiaries are such persons as finally determined in accordance with the Plan of Revitalization dated January 17, 2012 or the Alternate Beneficiaries if it is finally determined that the Plan of Revitalization dated January 17, 2012 may not be carried out. The Alternate Beneficiaries are all charitable institutions that had been named as universal heirs of the deceased Josef Grootkerk Zeldenrust in his last will immediately before to the last.

18. The Xavier Trust is the limited partner of a commercial Dutch limited partnership known as Pimjo Trust CV while the Joseph Trust is the General or Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV.

19. Pimjo Trust, C.V. is a “commanditaire vennootschap” (limited partnership) created under the laws of The Netherlands in accordance with article 19 of the Dutch Commercial Code (“Wetboek van Koophandel”) on July 19, 2001 in accordance with a Deed of Incorporation executed before Mr. Eelko Drewes Smit, civil law notary residing at The Hague, Netherlands.

20. The Deed of Incorporation of Pimjo Trust CV was amended on July 7, 2009 and is attached hereto as Exhibit “1”. The Deed of Creation as Amended on July 7, 2009 was further amended on April 15, 2012 by the Unanimous Resolution of the Partners of Pimjo Trust CV of April 15, 2012 which is attached as Exhibit “2”. The Reinstated Deed of Creation as Amended on April 15, 2012 is attached as Exhibit “3”.

21. Pimjo Trust CV has two assets, namely: the Account and the checking account at UMB Bank NA. 22. The point of inflection which originated the immediate conflict being brought to this Court occurred

on January 17, 2012, when the Board of Directors of Aguilar & Aguilar Limited, a New Zealand company, being the sole shareholder of Carisma Prima Limited, a New Zealand company, approved the Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization.

23. In order to ease the reading of this document, the term “Pimjo Organization” will be used to refer to “Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, originally a Dutch Civil Law (Continental Law) limited partnership, and as Trustee for the Xavier Trust acting in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV”.

24. On the very same day, in a meeting of shareholders of Carisma Prima Limited duly convened, the shareholders of Carisma Prima Limited approved the Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization and its implementation. The Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization consisted of two main steps: the plan of intervention of the Board of Directors of Carisma Prima Limited and the plan of institutionalization of Pimjo Organization. The plan of intervention of the Board of Directors implied the expulsion of Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and of Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo from their offices as directors of Carisma Prima Limited, their immediate cessation as directors and the revocation of all their powers.

25. The reason for the dismissal of the abovementioned individuals was that there was uncontestable and definitive proof that those individuals were involved irremediably, by action or omission,

4

knowingly and intentionally, in illegal actions that a court of law would consider as white collar crimes and organized crime.

26. Basically, on March 26, 2012, Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and of Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo (i) declared to Dennis P. McNamara their wish to be allowed to inspect the documents submitted by Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo to Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., (ii) alleged their ignorance of the structure and of the documentation, (iii) mentioned that they should not have been dismissed as directors of Carisma Prima Limited, (iv) mentioned that Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo had resigned as director of Carisma Prima Limited, (v) implied that they should have the control of the ownership of Pimjo Organization and (vi) asked advise from Dennis P. McNamara in the form of question(s).

27. The whole and complete conflict starts in August 10, 2010 – the date of the first paramount event - when Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo discovered that Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter and others falsified the financial statements of Chocolates El Rey, C.A., used those faked documents to fraudulent and illegally maintain and increase the lines of credit with financial institutions and defraud the shareholders, embezzlement of funds by Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter and other irregularities.

28. The second paramount event occurred in February 2011 when Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo discovered the embezzlement of US$ 500,000.00 by Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter for his own benefit, the misuse of funds of Chocolates El Rey, Inc., a Delaware corporation and registered as foreign corporation in the State of Texas and prohibited a certain transaction of purchase of treasury stock which would have been a fraudulent act.

29. The third paramount event occurred in February 2011 when Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo objected to certain transactions performed by Chocolates El Rey, C.A.

30. The fourth paramount event – which triggered and initiated the conflict with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and which unraveled the misconducts of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. - took place when Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo was notified by John Gayle Pettus Jaso, Branch Manager of the secret and illegal office operated illegally by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., on September 2011 that the Compliance Department of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. had “discovered” that he was serving as officer of non-party Fundación Pimjo, A.C. (event that was impossible to be believed) and that he had to resign with the consequence that the Account lacked authorized signatories.

31. The fifth paramount event took place when the said John Gayle Pettus Jaso revealed the existence of certain suspicious wire transfers made out of the Account about which Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo refused to give explanations when requested. The suspicious will later on grow even further when Luis Ugalde, s.j. – a non-party jesuist priest domiciled in Caracas, Venezuela, on March 16, 2012, will request to be paid out of the Account for amounts that were already included in the list of suspicious wire transfers already effectuated.

32. The sixth paramount event occurred on December 2011 when Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo received uncontestable and definitive proof that Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and of Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo were involved irremediably, by action or omission, knowingly and intentionally, in illegal actions that a court of law would consider as white collar crimes and organized crime and that Messrs. Rafael

5

Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo had been portraying as independent, uninterested, autonomous and self- directing directors of Carisma Prima Limited when they were not.

33. The Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization dated January 17, 2012 is attached hereto as Exhibit “4”. In my opinion, there is nothing but laudable in the Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization dated January 17, 2012.

34. Regarding the motion to Intervene, I request authorization from the Court to intervene in this trial with the objective of defending indirectly the interests of Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, originally a Dutch Civil Law (Continental Law) limited partnership, and as Trustee for the Xavier Trust acting in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV.

35. The objectives that I pursue with my intervention are mentioned in the paragraphs below. 36. To propose to the Court that the real truth behind this action is to futilely cover up illicit acts

performed by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and to escape from liabilities incurred by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.

37. To propose to the Court that the present action is being brought as a fraudulent use of the judiciary system of the United States of America in order to cover up illegal acts performed by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and to escape from liabilities incurred Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.

38. To propose to the Court that the present action is being brought in order to exert undue and unjust duress – bordering in a kind of extortion – against Pimjo Organization in order to cover up illegal acts performed by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and to escape from liabilities incurred Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.

39. To propose to the Court that this action is not really about Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. being unable to determine which entity and/or individual have the authority to instruct Plaintiff with regard to the Account. As a matter of fact, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. already knows - since July 19, 2001 when Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. itself through its own employees created Pimjo Trust CV in The Netherlands and executed without authorization the original creation document of Pimjo Trust CV and the “New Account Application” document dated October 11, 2001 – that the account title is Pimjo Trust CV and that the individual who has authority to instruct Plaintiff with regard to the Account is such person who represents Pimjo Trust CV either because is the Attorney-in-Fact of Pimjo Trust CV or is the legal representative of the Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV who is Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust. Therefore, simple logic indicates that the issue consists in determining who is the human being who is the Attorney-in-Fact and/or legal representative of the Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV.

40. Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo is the only human being who has been Attorney-in-Fact and/or legal representative of the Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV since the inception of Carisma Prima Limited.

41. To propose to the Court that it is untrue that Plaintiff is unable to determine which of the defendants may be entitled to the assets or some portion of the assets in the Account since there is no dispute that the account title and owner of the Account is Pimjo Trust CV and since Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. has actively participated in Pimjo Organization from January 25, 1995 until and including even today. There is no dispute about the corporate structure of Pimjo Organization since none but

6

Plaintiff has concluded that the corporate structure of Pimjo Organization is the one depicted supra. To worsen off the position of Plaintiff, it was its duty to know for certain the corporate structure of Pimjo Organization since its own employees and the specific person with the duty to monitor the corporate structure of Pimjo Organzation was a director with limited authority of the holding of Pimjo Trust CV. Plaintiff is aware of the existence of the alternative dispute resolution clauses contained in the Deed of Creation of Pimjo Trust CV that might have solved the underlying conflict swiftly. Indeed, in one circumstance during this conflict a binding solution with authority of res judicata with effects erga omnes might have been obtained in 72 hours. Since Plaintiff was actively involved in the activities of Pimjo Organization because acting in it through its own employees, it should be held that Plaintiff had constructive notice of all the terms governing Pimjo Organization and it is bound to them.

42. To propose to the Court that it is untrue that Plaintiff has no other means than this action of protecting itself against the threat of multiple liability from the defendants claims since it is Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.’s duty to know at all times the identites, the characteristics, and the characters – up to and including its ultimate beneficiaries - of all its clients and it already knows those elements without doubt. Every time Plaintiff alleges its own ignorance is confessing its gross negligence if not its intentions whose qualification might go well beyond the definition of gross negligence. In this line of thought, I propose to the Court the principle “Nemo auditur propiam turpitudinem allegans” barring Plaintiff to allege in its favor its own turpitude maxime when at the very same time such actions constitute a gross violation of legal duties imposed, by the federal laws of the United States of America aiming to protect the public interest, upon he who pretends to plea such turpitude in its own benefit.

43. To propose to the Court that there is no threat of multiple liability from the defendants claims since there are no threats from defendants. The alleged threats are unreal and invented in a sort of self-anticipated theatrical fear to pose as victim of circumstances beyond its control and have been expressed by “eventual claimants” - Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo – who are incapable of exercising, now or in the future, the representation of Pimjo Trust CV and Pimjo Organization. I would even propose to the Court that Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. – save for the testimonies of its Caracas Branch Manager John Gayle Pettus Jaso (who is the very first and efficient cause of this conflict as Plaintiff is concerned) - has no clue or evidence or proof of the identities of Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo or their counsels and the powers of such counsels and I would further propose to the Court that Plaintiff lacks any idea of the nature of such unreal and invented self-anticipated theatrical threats. Moreover, the only basis supporting a “threat” is mentioned in Exhibit F of the Complaint as per paragraph 26, page 6 of the Amended Complaint filed January 14, 2013. The quoted text by Plaintiff was taken out of context. Actually, Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo were requesting access to the documents that Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo had delivered to Plaintiff. The complete quote taken verbatim should have been:

7

“At this point, with no information in our possession, (LAA, as legal counsel, all of the Foundation's files have been in his possession and he has refused to tum them over) we cannot accept just turning over this account to LAA.

Therefore, we ask that you please remit copies of these for us to us to review. We wouldbe willing to travel to New York to meet with you and review the entire situation to try to arrive at some conclusion.

Lastly, while we do not wish to enter into any legal proceedings, we feel we must reserve our right to question the actions taken by LAA. We must also reserve our right to question any decision on your part to give him access to the funds without allowing us to make a proper review of documentation which you indicate empowers him to make the changes he has apparently made.

Please excuse us for any inconvenience, however, you must agree that given the size ofthe account and the implications of upsetting everything that we have been doing up until this time, it would be irresponsible to make any decisions without a proper review of the facts.”

Two issues show up from the above quoted paragraphs: the right reserved was “…to question any decision on your part to give him access to the funds without allowing us to make a proper review of documentation…” and the statement asserting that Plaintiff had acknowledged the rights of Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo in the following sentence: “…review of documentation which you indicate empowers him to make the changes…”

44. The fact omitted by Plaintiff is that Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo immediately upon knowing partially the content of Exhibit F of the Complaint on August 2, 20122 did authorize several times Plaintiff – starting August 7, 2012 - to allow the review of documents requested by Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo on March 26, 2012. In one of those several opportunities Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo wrote:

“I reiterate, repeat, restate, retell and iterate that, if you do not have done it already, I am not oppossed that you allow them to make a proper review of documentation. If this is the problem, please tell them to make a list of the documents they wish to review and everyone is happy. I will reserve confidential and all every letter and communications exchanged between Oppenheimer and us. But any documents pertaining oficially to Pimjo Trust CV or Carisma Prima Limited may be inspected by them. So ask them to make the list of documents they wish to see, I authorize those corporate documents, I will

2 I learnt of the partial content of the letter dated March 26, 2012 because it was quoted in the draft of Interpleader Complaint circulated by Plaintiff on August 2, 2012.

8

ask for approval to surrender those documents to the exdirectors for their review.”

45. There are two possibilities for Plaintiff to have reacted to this unmistakable authorization: Plaintiff did comply with my instructions in August 2012 and allowed Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo to review the documents or Plaintiff disobeyed and failed once again to comply with my instructions and did not allow the aforementioned persons to review the documentation. Under the first possibility, in the absence of a threat received after the review of documents on or after such review having taken place by Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo - which should be dated after on or after August 2012 - this action is baseless and unfounded for lack of threat. Under the second possibility, it is the very same Plaintiff who is causing damages to everyone due to its own voluntary disobedience and gross negligence.

46. If Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo believed that Plaintiff should have allowed them to review the documents, such individuals should have filed a suit to compel Plaintiff to show and produce the documents requested for review. That action did not take place.

47. If Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo believed that they should not have been expelled from the offices of Carisma Prima Limited, they should have filed a suit in New Zealand to compel Carisma Prima Limited or its sole shareholder - to re-appoint them as directors of Carisma Prima Limited. That action did not take place.

48. As a matter of fact, Plaintiff has not initiated any action before this one in more than a year and Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo have initiated none.

49. This Court may conclude what it is missing from the facts: nor Plaintiff neither Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo have initiated any actions anywhere but, to the contrary, have been refusing mediations and have been running away from the courts of law, the mediators and the arbitrators of the United States f America, of New Zealand and of Venezuela.

50. Had Plaintiff acted as a true fiduciary, it would have filed this action on May 2012. 51. I was informed by Mr. Michael Gibson, Counsel for Plaintiff, that Plaintiff was willing to withdraw

this action from this Court and re-file it in a State court. 52. For Plaintiff to be threatened by the eventual claimants - Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Astrid

Kristina Redmond Horn, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo – such persons should bring actions on behalf of Pimjo Trust CV against Plaintiff and for so doing, such persons must (i) assume control of the shares of Carisma Prima Limited either by force - which would be a fraudulent act – or either by an arbitration award or by a ruling of a court of New Zealand if the arbitration fails for whatever reason, (ii) cease Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo as director of Carisma Prima Limited and revoke his powers and the Power of Attorney issued to Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo, (iii) amend the Constitution of Carisma Prima Limited in order to abrogate the anti-corruption

9

and protection clauses existing in the Constitution of Carisma Prima Limited which impede them from being directors if they wish to be re-appointed themselves as directors, (iv) abrogate the Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization dated January 17, 2012 embodied in the Constitution of Carisma Prima Limited, (v) defraud the laws of New Zealand if they wish to be re-appointed themselves as directors of Carisma Prima Limited since they are disqualified to serve as directors of Carisma Prima Limited or if they appoint nominees to act on their behalf , (vi) amend the Deed of Creation of Pimjo Trust CV Limited in order to abrogate the anti-corruption and protection clauses existing in the Deed of Creation of Carisma Prima Limited, (vii) abrogate the Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization dated January 17, 2012 embodied in the Deed of Creation of Pimjo Trust CV, (viii) assume control of the Account and , finally, (ix) must sue Plaintiff for acting fraudulently in concert with Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo to cause damages to Pimjo Trust CV. The possibility of this events happening is zero.

53. To propose to the Court that Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo has a legitimate interest in the satisfactory solution of this case and that Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo is actually entrapped for the following reasons: 53.1. Failure to confront and contest the issue of the adulteration of the financial statements

of Chocolates El Rey, C.A., a non-party third person in which I shared its directorship, among others, with Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schalageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo would have meant becoming accomplice of crimes against Ley General de Bancos y Otras Instituciones de Crédito of November 13, 2001, July 31, 2008, December 23, 2009, August 19, 2010, Ley de Instituciones del Sector Bancario of March 2, 2011, Code of Commerce, Ley Orgánica Contra la Delincuencia Organizada and Penal Code of Venezuela and being subject to convictions for prison terms and stiff penalties;

53.2. Failure to confront and contest the issue of the violations of foreign exchange violations committed by non-party Chocolates El Rey, C.A. would have meant becoming accomplice of faults and subject to prison terms, confiscation of assets, reimbursements and stiff penalties under Ley de Régimen Cambiario of May 17, 1995, Ley Contra los Ilícitos Cambiarios of September 14, 2005, December 28, 2007, February 27, 2008 and May 17, 2010;

53.3. Failure to confront and contest the issues of the violations committed by Mr. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter in non-party Chocolates El Rey, Inc., a Delaware corporation, would have meant liabilities under the laws of the State of Texas and/or of the State of Delaware and violation of my fiduciary duties vis-à-vis the non-parties shareholders of non-party Chocolates El Rey, C.A. under the laws of New Zealand facing prison terms;

53.4. Failure to confront and contest the issues of the extraction of assets from non-party Amix Harbor Chocolates Prima Limited as trustee of non-parties US Matrix Trust, The Japan Matrix Trust and The Premium Brands Trust would have meant violation of my fiduciary duties vis-à-vis the non-parties shareholders of non-party Chocolates El Rey, C.A. under the laws of New Zealand facing prison terms;

53.5. Failure to confront and contest the issues of suspicious wire transfers ordered by Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and/or Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schalageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo with the assistance of Plaintiff’s Caracas Branch Manager John Gayle Pettus Jaso employee would have meant liabilities under Ley para la

10

Protección de la Autodeterminación y Soberanía Nacional of Venezuela facing stiff penalties and violating my fiduciary duties vis-à-vis Pimjo Organization under the laws of New Zealand facing prison terms;

53.6. Failure to confront and contest the issues of removing Mr. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schalageter - as announced on August 2012 – and / or Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and/or Messrs., Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo as directors of Carisma Prima Limited and the revocation of their powers to represent Pimjo Trust CV after having actual knowledge and spontaneous confessions in writing of being responsible of dishonest activities which a court of law may find as illicit actions, would have meant liabilities of my fiduciary duties under the laws of New Zealand facing prison terms;

53.7. Failure to denounce the existence of the secret branch office of Plaintiff in Caracas, Venezuela and its involvement in illegal activities would have meant liabilities of my fiduciary duties under the laws of New Zealand facing prison terms, violation of Ley de Abogados and of Código de Etica del Abogado Venezolano vis-à-vis Ley de Mercado de Capitales of October 22, 1998, August 17, 2010 and November 5, 2010 as well as eventually cooperating by acquiescence with activities against the public interests and public policies of the United States of America and Venezuela facing sanctions and / or liabilities in Veneuela, United States of America and New Zealand and failure to comply with my duties to protect the persons and assets upon having knowledge of the existence of illegal activities;

53.8. Failure to defend the assets of Pimjo Trust CV would mean exposure for violation of my fiduciary duties under the laws of New Zealand facing prison terms and exposure to personal liability vis-à-vis Pimjo Organization;

53.9. Returning to Venezuela might expose Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo to illegal and de facto retaliation from the Venezuela Nomenklatura if I do not cooperate and social retaliation if I cooperate with the Nomenklatura of that country. From a personal point of view, cooperating with the Nomenklatura of Venezuela would force me to act against my beliefs in passive resistance and strategic nonviolent action. Since the Venezuela Nomenklatura is already aware of the facts and there is public knowledge of the links existing between the Venezuela Nomenklatura and irregular groups operating in Venezuela (Fuerzas Armadas de Liberación de Colombia “FARC”, Frente Bolivariano de Liberación Nacional “FBLN”, Fuerzas Bolivarianas de Liberación, Ejército Bolivariano de Liberación, Ejército de Liberación Nacional “ELN” and urban insurgency groups) plus the possibility that those groups might mistakenly imagine that I have control to move assets from the Account, the possibility of being kidnapped for ransom is larger than zero. Actually, I took actions to somehow protect myself which were communicated to Plaintiff who did nothing.

53.10. Failure to investigate, confront and contest the possibility of the existence of “tainted money” and being involved involuntarily in money-laundering activities would mean exposure for violation of my fiduciary duties under the laws of New Zealand, exposure to personal liability vis-à-vis Pimjo Organization and immense problems with the agencies empowered with enforcing money laundering legislation around the globe;

11

54. To propose to the Court that Plaintiff is not a victim or passive agent of the status quo but, to the contrary, is the active agent and first cause of the actual problem facing Pimjo Organization which is, in fact, the real victim of Plaintiff actions.

55. To propose to the Court that Plaintiff has acted fraudulently. 56. To propose to the Court that Plaintiff has acted in fraud against this Court and intends to continue

with its tactic of delaying the resolution of this case. 57. To propose to the Court that, if it is finally determined that Plaintiff has not acted fraudulently, it has

incurred in unjustifiable gross negligence, have incurred in unjustifiable misrepresentation of the real facts and has grossly unfulfilled its duties of due diligence, “know your client” investigations, and protection of the security of the financial industry for more than 9 years not mentioning that has unfulfilled its duties vis-à-vis the Internal Revenue Service concealing the real identity of the ultimate beneficiary. The answer to the question as to how this was possible to happen may lie on the fact that it was against the own self- interests of John Gayle Pettus Jaso, Branch Manager of the illegal branch office of Plaintiff in Caracas, Venezuela, a citizen of the United States of America, to reveal the true final beneficiary. Therefore, Plaintiff – through its employee - devised the gimmick of revealing to the Internal Revenue Service that the final beneficiary of Pimjo Trust CV was Pimjo Trust CV itself and impeded any due diligence investigations about Pimjo Trust CV. I venture to propose to the Court that all those elements of false portrayal of Pimjo Trust CV as a natural individual (a widower and a retired human being), using false addresses, declaring false final beneficiaries, declaring false ultimate beneficial owner, using a secret account, informing false phone numbers and email addresses (the personal phone number of the client was declared and it appears as such in the computer records of Plaintiff as “212-237.6877” but connected to a false address in Amsterdam, The Netherlands when “212-237.6877” is the office phone number of Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo in Caracas, Venezuela and the email address declared and recorded in the computer system of Plaintiff was “[email protected]” when the email address of Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo is [email protected]) false marital status, false employment, false entity determination, false investment strategies, false investment objectives, and false characterization of Pimjo Trust CV as a human being that have been discovered during the investigations made by Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo where carefully implemented in order to cause an unjust damage to Pimjo Organization. Please note that my email address “[email protected]” was created on or after January 11, 2009 so that means that someone knowing and intentionally did indeed access the records of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to incorporate such false information in Plaintiff´s records after that date.

58. To file a counterclaim against Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. for restitution of moneys, indemnification of losses and damages caused and punitive damages.

59. To file a cross claim against Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo for damages caused. I do not pretend at this very moment to file a cross claim against Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn since I consider that she – even without her actually knowing it - is an innocent victim of the misdeeds of his own father Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter.

60. To file a third-party claim against John Gayle Pettus Jaso and Dennis P. McNamara – employees of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. for their illicit actions performed both in New York and in Caracas,

12

Venezuela. I will consider later on if I file a third-party claim against other officers of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. who might have cooperated in the fraudulent actions and illicit activities.

61. To move the Court to give actual notice to the proper authorities of the United States of America of the facts narrated in this document in order to initiate and take proper action against those who may be found liable for the wrongdoings, if the court finds any.

62. The direct aggressor of Pimjo Organization in this case is Plaintiff Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. While the Plaintiff poses as an innocent victim of the circumstances, the real fact is that Plaintiff is the primary cause and sole responsible for the status quo both for its illegal business practices performed illegally and secretively in Venezuela and because Plaintiff – through its employees - failed to exercise its legal duties and responsibilities. Actually, I pose to the Court the proposition that the circumstances that Plaintiff proclaims being an innocent victim of were actually a planned conspiracy to deprive the assets in the Account from its legitimate owner.

63. Contrary to what seems on the surface, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. is inadequately filing this Interpleader Complaint with the hidden agenda of exhausting Pimjo Organization from human and financial resources and benefiting from the passage of time vis-à-vis the statute of limitations for its transgressions.

64. Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo is the only person interfering with the objectives of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. of not being held accountable for its transgressions. I venture to propose to the Court that Plaintiff is or was acting in concert with Ms Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo.

65. The Court should know that the day of the conference with the Court on January 22, 2013 was the 365th day of Pimjo Organization dealing with the “obstacle” of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. (since 2012 was a leap year). Plaintiff has had in its possession accurate and true documentation supplied by Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo (by last the account, more than 92 as of September 10, 2012) showing the real corporate structure and ownership of the Account and the true authority vested upon Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo continuously and without interruption – without solution of continuity - since the incorporation of Carisma Prima Limited on March 31, 2008. From spontaneous confession, it is a proven fact that Plaintiff was full and totally unaware of the existence of those documents. Moreover, it seems that its employee John Gayle Pettus Jaso, Manager of the secret and illegal Branch Office of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. in Caracas, Venezuela concealed those documents presumably for its own benefit. It is my opinion that, by concealing the documentation, blocking the mandatory due diligence investigations and other illegal practices such as deviating correspondence addressed to Pimjo Trust CV to addresses controlled by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., John Gayle Pettus Jaso might have planned to continue his illegal attempt of taking ownership of the Account initiated in July 19, 2001. Had I disappeared, the existing documentation in the files of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. would have allowed John Gayle Pettus Jaso to pose, direct or indirectly, as the owner in control of the Account even though such documentation was fraudulently produced in 2001 and voided on November 29, 2001. From information received from an informant, a case similar like this hypothesis might have happened involving another Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.’ s Caracas Branch office employee and broker dealer named Karl Krause, now deceased, who, apparently, obtained control of an account of a deceased client.

13

66. I refer to Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. as being an “obstacle” because my mandate was and is to reorganize and revitalize Pimjo Organization, expel from the Pimjo Organization individuals who, from information and belief, have incurred in white collar crimes and actions qualified as organized crimes and to transfer the management and control of Pimjo Organization to new independent, autonomous, responsible, accountable, honest and emotional and intellectually valuable individuals, transparent and democratically elected to run Pimjo Organization under sound principles of corporate governance. This plan was adopted and approved on January 17, 2012 and it is entitled Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization. The Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization approved on January 17, 2012 has been incorporated within the Constitution (equivalent to the articles of incorporation and by-laws of U. S. corporations) of Carisma Prima Limited and within the Deed of Creation of Pimjo Trust CV as essential part for the very existence of both entities. Plaintiff has had actual knowledge and possession of such plan since the early stages of this conflict. Unfortunately, the more I investigated, the more Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.’s miseries surfaced. Actually, it is ironic and cruel that Pimjo Organization´s primary foe and adversary is the one in custody of the funds without any supervision and accountability whatsoever and without solving the fundamental issues that affect Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. legitimacy. I attach hereto as Exhibit “5” a copy of the letter sent to Dennis P. McNamara dated May 8, 2012 explaining how illogical Plaintiff behavior was.

67. I also refer to Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. as being an “obstacle” because it is virtually impossible to communicate and to interact with human beings representing the Plaintiff who in 365 days have been incapable of understanding the facts and the nature of the entities involved in this case and who are still so confused that have accomplished to cause so much damage and loss of time and efforts to everyone including this Court.

68. The main adverse circumstances affecting Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. which transformed Plaintiff as a foe of Pimjo Trust CV were: 68.1. Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. was operating in secrecy an illegal operation in Caracas,

Venezuela. 68.2. Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. was operating in Venezuela in the financial industry – as fully

reserved and supervised industry as it is the financial industry of the United States of America - without corporate and governmental authorizations. Around the globe, the local financial entities of every nation and the multinational financial entities have become extremely sensitive areas in order to protect the public interests of all nations against the threats of terrorism, terrorism financing and money laundering. There is no excuse to have illegal and secret operations in the financial industry anywhere in the world.

68.3. Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. was involved in transactions prohibited in Venezuela, usurping activities highly supervised and controlled.

68.4. Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., due to its lack of control and supervision, allowed the existence of parallel and undetectable flows of moneys not supervised by the governmental agencies of the United States of America and of Venezuela empowered to monitor and enforce anti- money laundering practices. Moreover, I pose to this Court that from information supplied by an informant, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. created three identification codes to the accounts opened illegally in Venezuela whose ultimate objective was to conceal the real identities of the

14

clients from the authorities in Venezuela and from the authorities of the United States of America.

68.5. Mutatis mutandi, with the grace of the Court and with the sole purpose of illustrating the extent of the misconducts of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., just imagine a foreign corporation (whether or not owned by terrorists) opening a secret office in downtown Manhattan with the purpose of offering unregistered foreign issued securities to a certain group of the population in the United States of America, capturing or obtaining funds in U.S. currency in exchange, funneling those funds to specific receivers without the knowledge of U.S. authorities, using means of commercial trade, business, movement of goods or money, or transportation from one state or country to another by means governed by the federal laws of the United States of America and / or regulated by the federal government, with the federal regulatory and enforcement authorities not being aware of the existence of those activities taking place.

68.6. The 29 misconducts detected so far involving Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and its employees and officers have been explained in extenso in complaint filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (Complaint Reference Number TCR1344465787941) and with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (Complaint Number 1960837) and have been presented in a nutshell as follows:

“I handle the hypothesis that Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting as Managing Partner of the limited partnership Pimjo Trust CV might be involuntarily involved in a case dealing with (1) illegal money movements, (2) violations of foreign exchange controls, (3) lack of regulatory compliance and supervision, (4) actions contemplated as crimes of organized groups qualified as organized associations under Ley Orgánica contra la Delincuencia Organizada in Venezuela, (5) failures of mandatory anti-money laundering compliance programs and the effects of reincidence after Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. NYSE Hearing Board Panel Decision 05-181 of December 29, 2005,(6) failures of mandatory anti-money laundering compliance programs and the effects of reincidence after John Gayle Pettus NYSE Hearing Board Decision 06-82 of June 27, 2006, (7) transactions performed without trading authorization, (8) money movements out of the account without authorization or registered signatory, (9) opening and operating an account 26201338505041 at UMB Bank N.A. without authorization and authorized signatory,(10)concealing from compliance officers vital data of the client, (11) violation of conflict of interests rules and Code of Ethics, (12) intentional lack of KYC and compliance reviews, (13)illegal exercise of businesses in the financial sector in Venezuela without authorization, (14) performing illegal banking activities such as wire transfers expressly reserved to authorized banks, (15) concealing information concerning compliance duties, (16) redirecting clients´s mail to brokers controlled addresses different from client´s address, (17) acting as director of client without having cleared conflict of interests and providing misleading and false information about it, (18) denial to supply information

15

concerning transactions done with account 26201338505041 at UMB Bank NA, (19) supplying false information about the Final Beneficiary Owner in W- 8BEN form, (20) filing misleading information to SEC in Form 10-K concerning the nature of their business and their locally operated entity in Venezuela, (21) performing actions against Ley Contra Ilícitos Cambiarios in Venezuela, (22) filing misleading information to SEC about operations in Venezuela and sources of revenues, (23) recognizing and taking possession of revenue produced by illegal activities in Venezuela, (24) exerting undue and unjust pressure threatening client´s representative with an interpleader action while blocking access to the account in order to, finally, cover up weaknesses due to intentional violation of laws of Venezuela, (26) performing a movement of funds circa February 15, 2012 while the account was allegedly restricted by Oppenheimer and there was no authorized signatory (26) avoidance of income taxes in Venezuela in order to cover up other hypothesis mentioned before, (27) avoidance of value added taxes in Venezuela in order to cover up hypothesis mentioned before, (28) failure to recognize authority of client claiming lack of understanding of a "complex multi-national corporate structure" created without authorization by Oppenheimer employees and with the participation of those employees as directors of the "complex multi-national corporate structure" until their forced resignation in November 2011, (29) possibly filing misleading information in forms U4. (30) I handle the hypothesis that the findings mentioned in the NYSE decisions previously mentioned about transactions through wire transfers and intra-Firm journal transfers between unrelated clients "for no apparent economic benefit" might have involved the use of the account 26201338505041 at UMB Bank N.A., the client´s account in Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and that the economic benefit might have been illegal foreign exchange transactions where the other part of the complete transaction was done in Bolivars exchanged in Venezuela. I reserve the right to add more circumstances.”

68.7. I attach herewith as Exhibit “6” a copy of the 188-page expanded complaint filed on September 10, 2012 with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the United States of America which is materially identical to the complaint filed the same date with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority of the United States of America save for names, dates, addresses and reference numbers.

68.8. I propose to this Court to consider that this action involves a delicate issue of international comity vis-à-vis the relationships between the common public interests and public policies of the United States of America and the public interests and public policies of República Bolivariana de Venezuela.

68.9. The Court must be informed that Servicio Bolivariano de Inteligencia Nacional of Venezuela (a sort of political intelligence and enforcement secret service and presumably highly infiltrated by agents of the G2 secret service of Cuba) already knows of the activities performed by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. in Venezuela. The same knowledge is shared by several other

16

governmental regulatory agencies in Venezuela3, namely: the Ministry of the Popular Power for Internal Affairs and Justice, the Ministry of the Popular Power of Planning and Finance, the Superintendency of Institutions of the Banking Sector, the National Superintendency of Securities, and the Office of the National Prosecutor of República Bolivariana de Venezuela. Why no action has been taken yet against Plaintiff is a matter subject to speculation but I propose – without affirming - to the Court two possibilities: One that took place in my presence on August 10, 2012 is that Servicio Bolivariano de Inteligencia Nacional of Venezuela is waiting for my return to Venezuela to take actions against Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. as raiding Plaintiff’s office and incarcerating its employees. Indeed, I was asked to report to the main offices of Servicio Bolivariano de Inteligencia Nacional of Venezuela upon my return to Venezuela. The interview – arranged by officers of the Ministry of the Popular Power of Planning and Finance, was with Servicio Bolivariano de Inteligencia Nacional of Venezuela’s General Secretary Coronel Rafael Ruiz – second in command - who showed extreme interest in the case. The Court must be informed that the only safe course of action to preserve the assets and personal freedom of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., its Venezuela based employees, Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn, and Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández, Germán Toro Arévalo and myself is for me not to return to Venezuela even if this action is resolved by the Court. The other one, suggested by an individual known as “Nikon 1” who contacted me in October 2012, is because there might be funds in Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. that belong direct or indirectly to high ranking members of the Venezuelan Nomenklatura (PEPs or Politically Exposed Persons), contacted through the secret Caracas Branch Office of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. From information supplied by Nikon 1, there seems to be three numerical branch codes for the accounts opened by the secret branch office of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. in Caracas, Venezuela, and it seems that two of them are designed to conceal the identities of the clients from the authorities in Venezuela if a leak occurs and one of those two last codes is used to conceal the identities of the clients, as per the informant, even from the authorities of the United States of America. Additionally, Servicio Bolivariano de Inteligencia Nacional of Venezuela already knows about the political activities of Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter and Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández in Venezuela. The Court should be informed that it is possible that Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández, and Germán Toro Arévalo might have improperly misused funds of Pimjo Trust CV to finance political activism in Venezuela against the actual Venezuela Nomenklatura with the assistance of Mr. John Gayle Pettus Jaso. The Court should be informed – and I pose the following as an hypothesis - that if the authorities of Venezuela have decided not to take actions against Plaintiff Caracas branch office it might be because of existing links with the actual Nomenklatura in Venezuela. If such is the case, we might be facing issues which might be connected with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of the United States of America.

3 The correct names in Spanish are: Ministerio del Poder Popular para las Relaciones Interiores y Justicia, Ministerio del Poder Popular de Planificación y Finanzas, Superintendencia de las Instituciones del Sector Bancario, Superintendencia Nacional de Valores, and Fiscalía General de la República.

17

68.10. The Court must be informed that while Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. was posing as if “studying” and “verifying” the documentation supplied by Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo, its main concern was to ascertain how illegal and fragile its status quo in Venezuela was by hiring the Caracas, Venezuela affiliate office of Baker & McKenzie and consulting Eugenio Hernández Bretón, Esq. on this specific matter.

68.11. The Court must be informed that this “Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.-negotiating/bargaining-parody” of the Interpleader Complaint to be filed at this very same U. S. Court for the Southern District of New York dates back to April 9, 2012. I can not imagine that during 281 days, Plaintiff has been able to fail to consider the matter of proper jurisdiction before this Court.

68.12. Pimjo Organization has vehement and clearly demanded Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to file the Interpleader Complaint since May 5, 2012 and Plaintiff have failed to comply. Plaintiff took 243 days to file the first Interpleader Complaint even though the first draft of the complaint was circulated by Plaintiff on August 2, 2012 that is: 141 days after circulating the first draft of the complaint.

68.13. Admitting my ignorance about Common Law and of the underlying mechanism of the action in interpleader, I wrote on May 7, 2012 a 44-page letter to Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. demonstrating that their actions were against common-sense and universal legal logic. Whether or not Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo were, just or unjustly, ceased as directors of Carisma Prima Limited, is a matter that pertains to the laws of New Zealand not to the laws of the United States of America. However, the fact that Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo is the legal representative of Pimjo Organization is uncontestable. Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo have the burden of proof to prove that they are directors of Carisma Prima Limited because a court of law or an arbitrator reinstated them as directors in full exercise of their offices and powers. But simile modo, in order for Plaintiff to disobey my instructions, it must assert and prove that I am not the sole Director and Managing Director continuously and without interruption of Carisma Prima Limited and Attorney-in-Fact of Pimjo Trust CV. Moreover, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.’s employee and Caracas Office Branch Manager assigned as Broker Dealer of the Account and encharged of regulatory compliance of the Account delivered his resignation as Director of Carisma Prima Limited on October 31, 2011 to Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo and requested me several times to incorporate my signature as authorized signature of the Account which I final and very carefully did on January 23, 2012.

68.14. At the beginning, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. tried to pose as an uninterested mediator but, in reality, it was a posture to gain time and contain damages. The Court should know that the first 8-page draft of the Interpleader Complaint prepared by Plaintiff counsel Satterlee Stephens Burke & Burke was emailed to me on August 2, 2012 circa 12:00 m., few hours before an informal mediation meeting held in Caracas, Venezuela arranged by bona fide persons with Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter and Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández - which turned out to be an occasion to deliver an ultimatum with the intention to force Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo to desist . On August 5, 2012, Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo invested his time to even correct the first biased draft of the Interpleader Complaint prepared by Plaintiff’s counsel

18

Satterlee Stephens Burke & Burke LLP – plagued with mistakes – which, as said, was emailed to me on August 2, 2012 circa 12:00 m in synchrony with the informal mediation meeting to be held that night. But still both Plaintiff and counsel for Plaintiff continue today incurring in several of those very same mistakes which were repeated in the Interpleader Complaint filed on December 20, 2012 and in the Amended Interpleader Complaint filed on February 14, 2013 and incredibly presented to the Court confusingly during the conference held on January 22, 2013. To name a few:

68.14.1. Characterizing me as a citizen of the United States of America while footnote 1 of page 4 of the Amended Interpleader Complaint stated: “Upon information and belief, Mr. Aguilar is a citizen of the nation of Venezuela” aggravated by the fact that they had a certified copy of my passport since January 23, 2012.

68.14.2. Characterizing Carisma Prima Limited as a limited liability company (or as an equivalent of a U.S. limited liability company style of entity) trying to construe a theory similar to the income tax characteristic of a pass through and transparent entity.

68.14.3. Characterizing Pimjo Trust CV as a trust. 68.14.4. Characterizing Pimjo Trust CV as a charitable trust when it is a commercial law

entity. 68.14.5. Paragraph 2 and 7 of the Interpleader Complaint are self-contradictory. 68.14.6. Characterizing non-party Fundación Pimjo A.C. as beneficiary of Pimjo Trust CV

(and even of the The Xavier Trust and The Joseph Trust) having actual knowledge that Fundación Pimjo A.C. had been removed as beneficiary.

68.14.7. Characterizing The Xavier Trust as the trustee of Pimjo Trust CV. 68.14.8. Characterizing The Joseph Trust as the trustee of Pimjo Trust CV. 68.14.9. Charaterizing the underlying conflict as if there were a dispute between

defendants. 68.14.10. Charaterizing the underlying conflict as if there were a dispute with regard to

the Account. 68.14.11. Characterizing Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo as member of Carisma Prima

Limited when in paragraph 22 admits that Aguilar & Aguilar Limited (a New Zealand company) is the sole shareholder of Carisma Prima Limited.

68.14.12. Characterizing Jorge Mateo Redmond Schalageter as member of Carisma Prima Limited when in paragraph 22 admits that Aguilar & Aguilar Limited is the sole shareholder of Carisma Prima Limited and having actual notice that the last will of Jorge Mateo Redmond Schalageter expressly includes the statement that the estate of the said Jorge Mateo Redmond Schalageter does not include any rights over Carisma Limited nor over Carisma Prima Limited.

68.14.13. Omitting to the Court the existence of Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and Messrs. Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo as co-actors.

68.14.14. Omitting to the Court that Germán Toro Arévalo - weird and strangely - withdrew “from everything” connected with Pimjo Organization on August 15, 2012 and became adversary of Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter and Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández supplying vital information for

19

enforcing the conflict solution clauses governing conflicts in Pimjo Trust CV to Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo and about this case due to the fact that Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. withheld that information to Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo and which was essential to the exercise of the system of resolution of conflicts embodied within the organizational documents of Pimjo Trust CV.

68.14.15. Paragraph 12 and foot note 1 on page 4 are self-contradictory. 68.14.16. Omitting to the Court that - secretively, illegally and without authorization - the

creation of Pimjo Trust CV and the opening of the Account was undertaken by Plaintiff’ s employees for their own benefit appointing themselves as limited partners of Pimjo Trust CV against the wishes of Josef Grootkerk Zeldenrust and his last will in order to misappropriate those funds and using the funds in the Account to create and maintain such entity and the related entities created by them together with Pimjo Trust CV. I even propose to the Court the possibility that the document opening the account with Plaintiff was falsely dated as executed in New York.

68.14.17. Omitting to the Court that - secretively, illegally and without authorization - Plaintiff’s employees and for their own benefit transferred all assets existing in the account of Pimjo S.A. to the Account with the intention to circumvent the effects of the last will of Josef Grootkerk Zeldenrust.

68.14.18. Omitting to the Court that Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. allowed trading in the Account from July 19, 2001 until May 19, 2005 and from December 18, 2006 until and including today without any trading authorization having been granted by the owner of the Account and that Plaintiff allowed moneys to be extracted from the Account without an authorization ever having been issued to that effect.

68.14.19. Referring to Rafael Jesus Alfonzo Hernandez as Rafael Jesus Alfonzao Hernandez.

68.14.20. Referring to Rafael Jesus Alfonzo Hernandez as Mr. Hernandez. 68.14.21. Referring to German Toro Arevalo as Mr. Arevalo. 68.14.22. The Power of Attorney mentioned in paragraph 20 was not issued on July 7,

2009. 68.14.23. Characterizing that the removal of Ms. Redmond and the other ex-directors was

a unilateral act of Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo (mistakenly mentioning Aguilar & Aguilar when the proper name is Aguilar & Aguilar Limited, a new Zealand company) and, again, referring to Rafael Jesus Alfonzo Hernandez as Mr. Hernandez and to German Toro Arévalo as Mr. Arevalo.

68.14.24. Mentioning in paragraph 22 that the sole shareholder of Carisma Prima Limited removed Mr. Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo as director of Carisma Prima Limited which is would have been impossible under the laws of New Zealand since it is not allowed to have a company in existence without directors.

68.14.25. Omitting to the Court that, quite the contrary, resolution 7 of the SPECIAL RESOLUTION OF THE SHAREHOLDER dated January 17, 2012 stated: “ 7.-THAT the sole shareholder Aguilar & Aguilar Limited does hereby authorize the ratification of Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo as Director and Managing Director of Carisma Prima Limited

20

entrusted to and conferred on any and all of the powers exercisable by the board of directors to be exercised by the Managing Director as he may think fit. AND FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the following digital signature of Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo is hereby authorized as the approved electronic signature of the said Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo, as Director and Managing Director of Carisma Prima Limited, to subscribe and sign any and all necessary forms and correspondence to be issued, sent, faxed, emailed or electronically filed as the said person seems fit“. The language of the Unanimous Joint and Special Resolution of the Shareholder and Managing Director of that very same date is even stronger and was kept in confidence in order to protect the legitimate interests of innocent persons and the reputation of the directors being expelled.

68.14.26. Characterizing that a dispute exists about which entities have authority over the Account.

68.14.27. Omitting to the Court that Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. announced and revealed the existence of the letter (Exhibit D of the Complaint) dated February 9, 2012 – not the existence of the conflict over the authority to the Account neither the content of such letter – only on March 13, 2012 and even promised in writing on March 23, 2012 that the matter of authorizing the access of Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo to the Account was to be solved the week after (between March 26 and March 30, 2012). Actually, the full content of the letters in possession of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. was made available to Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo by Mr. German Toro Arévalo after August 15, 2012.

68.14.28. Omitting to the Court that upon having formulated the specific question, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. failed to inform that it had received conflicting instructions from the ex-directors.

68.14.29. Omitting to the Court that the “complex multi-national corporate structure” was created by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. 's employees who participated in it direct and actively from January 25, 1995 and claiming repeatedly lack of knowledge of everything important and relevant concerning its client when the truth is that Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. was obliged to know - because mandates of the laws of the United States of America - and because it was Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. who created Pimjo Trust CV in sordid circumstances in July 19, 2001 plus the fact that two employees of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. served as active directors or representatives of past and present entities of Pimjo Organization. With the grace of the Court, let me suggest that anyone having the facts so wrong and confused will find the corporate structure a “complex multi-national corporate structure”.

68.14.30. Omitting to the Court that Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. was caught lying on March 28, 2012 and received a complaint from Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo about that fact because having given false and misleading information about its involvement concerning the secret account opened at UMB Bank NA, Kansas City, Mo., by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. for Pimjo Trust CV. That was the point of inflection that caused Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to become adversary of Pimjo Trust CV

68.14.31. Omitting to the Court that Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo had requested Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. since May 5, 2012 to file the Interpleader Complaint.

21

68.14.32. Omitting to the Court that since circa August 3, 2012, Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo had asked repeatedly Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to include him as defendant in the interpleader complaint in order to defend Pimjo Organization from the very same Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. Of course, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. did not proceed as requested.

68.14.33. Omitting to the Court that Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. refused, at least twice and perhaps thrice, mediation.

68.14.34. Omitting to the Court that Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. does not answer my calls and has prohibited Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo access to, at least, its premises located in Boca Raton, Florida if not to all its premises.

68.14.35. Omitting to the Court the existence of the complaints filed in SEC, FINRA and the Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York against Plaintiff.

68.14.36. Omitting to the Court the existence of the complaint filed in the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas against Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter et al. for misuse of funds of non-party Chocolates El Rey, Inc. for their own benefit.

68.14.37. Omitting to the Court that, having admitted that the principal offices of Pimjo Trust CV are located in Auckland, New Zealand, Plaintiff has failed to send correspondence and mail to Pimjo Trust CV to its address in Auckland, New Zealand, since and including March 2012.

68.14.38. Omitting to the Court that Ms Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn and Messrs. Jorge Mateo Redmond Schlageter, Rafael Jesús Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo refused more than thrice offers for mediation, refused to be appointed (under protest) as attorneys-in-fact of Pimjo Trust CV, refused to be re-appointed (under protest) as directors of Carisma Prima Limited, refused to appear for compulsory mediation at Centro Empresarial de Conciliación y Arbitraje (CEDCA) in Caracas, Venezuela, when formally served, failed to appear for mediation proceedings on August 15, 2012 in Boca Raton, Florida and alleged by way of ultimatum on April 26, 2012 that their sole acceptable option was for me to transfer to them “the shareholder control of Pimjo Trust CV”.

68.14.39. Omitting to the Court that Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo had to maneuver and break the circle created by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. which invariable lead to contact only broker dealer John Gayle Pettus Jaso in Caracas, Venezuela with respect of the Account preventing me from accessing the Office of the Chief Compliance Officer of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc . For that reason, I personally appeared in Plaintiff’ s Branch Office located in Boca Raton, Florida in early February 2012 and requested the protection from, and the intervention of, the Office of the Chief Compliance Officer of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. naively thinking that such officer would have interest in mending the wrongdoings and misdeeds suffered by Pimjo Organization vis-à-vis the Account. I wish to point out that my strategy and actions were always transparent and directed towards the chief officers of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. unknowing that such officers were very well aware of all the illegal actions performed in Venezuela and decided to protect broker dealer John Gayle Pettus Jaso and cover up his actions and the corporate business strategy of Plaintiff to attract customers and assets in Venezuela.

22

68.14.40. Omitting to the Court that Allen B. Holeman, Chief Compliance Officer of Plaintiff, following instructions of Dennis P. McNamara, Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Plaintiff, delivered on March 6, 2012 to Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo copies of the statements of account of the Account from year 2001 until February 2012 and copies of the account of Pimjo SA from year 2000 until 2001.

68.14.41. Omitting to the Court that the changes to the corporate structure were initially limited to incorporate the Rules on Combating Corruption. 2011 edition, promoted by the International Chamber of Commerce. Later on, and in coherence with the Plan of Revitalization dated January 17, 2012 which was made integral part of all corporate documents of Pimjo Organization, the description of the First Beneficiary was modified and the ADR clauses in the Constitution of Carisma Prima Limited incorporated.

68.15. Informant Nikon 1 suggested that the Account was being “churned” by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.’s broker dealer John Gayle Pettus Jaso. Informant Nikon 1 mentioned that the Account was “bread and butter” for broker dealer John Gayle Pettus Jaso. Only an expert will be able to determine if this statement is true or false and for that purpose all account statements of the Account are necessary.

69. I have nothing else to say with respect to the motion to authorize Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo to exercise his right to self-representation or pro se legal representation as contemplated in 28 U.S.C. § 1654 in order to advocate on his own behalf before this Court with the sole purpose of defending indirectly the rights of defendant Carisma Prima Limited and its underlying entities which are defenseless.

70. I have nothing else to say with respect to the motion to order Plaintiff to amend again its complaint in lieu of the fact that it is plagued with mistakes and contradictions.

71. With respect to the motion to appoint Sullivan & Cromwell, New York, 125 Broad Street, New York, NY 10004, as counsel and attorneys for defendant(s) Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, originally a Dutch Civil Law (Continental Law) limited partnership[, and as Trustee for the Xavier Trust acting in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV] together with the order to Plaintiff Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to cover from the funds existing in the Account blocked by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. the fees and expenses incurred by defendant(s) in its (their) defense against Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and others, I would like to propose to the Court the considerations contained in the following paragraphs.

72. The Court must be informed that the Deed of Creation of Pimjo Trust CV – the law between the parties – incorporates a system for resolution of conflicts. The system provides for conflicts to be solved, firstly, by mandatory mediation and, subsequently, by arbitration ex aequo et bono. The actions of Plaintiff Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. impeded and obstructed the application of the alternate dispute resolution clauses. While Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. failed to answer and communicate and delayed the filing of the Interpleader Complaint, the ex-directors assumed a “stonewalling” attitude. These ADR clauses are from clause 31 to clause 70. Had these rules been followed and obeyed, this case would not have been ever brought to this Court.

73. I even propose to the Court that Plaintiff is bound by these clauses of alternate dispute resolution. 74. One paramount clause is the power granted in clause 62 to the arbitrator which reads as follows:

“The arbitrator shall grant such relief as necessary in order to place the parties in conflict in the

23

position of attending the arbitration free from pressures and duress. It is the fundamental duty of the arbitrator to equalize the leverage of each party in order to secure that no party is precluded from exercising and/or seeking and/or obtaining effectively justice in equity because of the adverse consequences borne because of the passage of time or because of differences in monetary resources and/or because the overwhelming spending, usage, or attempts to deplete one party, of monetary resources.” Within the spirit of the rules governing Pimjo Organization, that law between the parties freely chosen, applies to such person who ultimately has the power or duty to judge this case.

75. All funds of Pimjo Organization are blocked by Plaintiff and Plaintiff is fully aware of that fact taking advantage of it for its benefit. I have already proposed that the real adversary of Pimjo Organization is Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. Plaintiff has already declared that it has no claim to the Account. There is no question that the Account is owned by Pimjo Trust CV. It is in the best interests of Pimjo Trust CV to have access to such funds in order to provide for its own defense moreover if its real adversary is the custodian of the Account.

76. I move the Court to allow Pimjo Organization to use the funds in the blocked Account to cover fees and expenses for its defense.

77. I suggest Sullivan & Cromwell because it is a reputable and trustworthy New York law firm and because it was the first firm that I contacted back in October 2011 to help and guide me in the design, preparation and drafting of the Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization. Actually, it was meant in the Plan of Revitalization of Pimjo Organization dated January 17, 2012 that Sullivan & Cromwell or someone designated by it performed the role of Ombudsman in order to guarantee the good order of the Plan of revitalization in accordance with the wishes of Joseph Grootkerk Zeldenrust.

78. With respect to the motion to appoint counsel for Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo I would like to propose to the Court the considerations contained in the following paragraphs.

79. It is my sincere belief that the real facts not yet known to this Court might derive the cause from the civil jurisdiction to the criminal jurisdiction.

80. I can not claim that I am “pauper” but, relative to the amounts at stake and the fees and expenses that this trial implies, I just can not afford to pay legal counsel and expenses and I have no assets to dispose of, or lenders to borrow from, to finance this action.

81. Technically, I have surrendered all rights over any assets that I might have owned to my wife as part of an agreement in lieu of our separation and eventual divorce whose cause was intimately connected with the existence of this conflict.

82. As fiduciary agent for Pimjo Organization, I am entitled to financial assistance from Pimjo Organization while defending its rights.

83. I have tried to retain counsel twice for Pimjo Organization and I am in negotiations with two other prospective counsels. One New York law firm – Richards Kibbe & Orbe LLP - had been engaged for the pretrial stage and withdrew unilaterally from the engagement letter arguing that since my authority had been contested by third parties, the engagement letter was null and void. I enclose as Exhibit “7” copy of the letter received from the said law firm. The other law firm – Scarlett Gucciardo & Hirsch – from Delray, Florida - decided not to assist Pimjo Trust CV hours before the conference held in the Court on January 22, 2013 since some of my proposed changes to their draft of the

24

Engagement Letter received in the afternoon of January 21, 2012, “…have led me to become very concerned about your authority with respect to the subject entities, including Carisma Prima.”. I am in conversations with two law firms but have not concluded any engagement yet.

84. In order to ease the financial burden on Pimjo Organization, I move the Court to appoint me counsel pro bono and, if unavailable, to order Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to disburse the funds out of the Account necessary for my defense allowing Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo to hire suitable counsel.

85. This motion seems to be coherent with the rules governing Pimjo Trust CV contained in the Deed of Creation of Pimjo Trust CV and consistent with the transparency and independence owed to Pimjo Organization.

86. I have been advised by three lawyers not yet engaged and not yet familiar with the case not to file these motions. I am, bona fide, following a course of action that seems reasonable after considering the language of the Court during the conference held on January 22, 2013. The Court mentioned "to act promptly" and "soon enough" and 15 days have elapsed now since then. In no way whatsoever I am suggesting that the Court gave me advise of any kind since the Court only pointed out the existence of Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

87. The motion to warn counsel for Plaintiff to be accurate with the facts and to request counsel for Plaintiff that notices should be processed with adequate and sufficient time is based upon the fact that the email from Mr. Michael Gibson giving me notice about the conference held on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 last was sent by counsel for Plaintiff to me at 18:16 EST of Friday, January 18, 2013, after the close of business, and at the beginning of a long weekend (since Monday, January 21, 2013 was a federal holiday: Martin Luther King Day). Even though counsel for Plaintiff has refused to acknowledge when he was aware of the invitation of the Court, it seems that he had knowledge of such invitation on Janaury 16, 2013 at 16:31 EST.

88. With respect to the motion to compel Plaintiff Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. to obey and execute the instructions duly communicated and the absence of which are placing unjustifiable risks on the assets of Pimjo Trust CV deposited at Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., I have the considerations expressed in the following paragraphs

89. Counsel for Plaintiff failed to describe the nature of my “numerous emails to Oppenheimer”. Aside from following up and chasing Plaintiff employees – especially Mr. McNamara - , my emails contained instructions aimed to protect the assets of Pimjo Organization.

90. The following is a list of my instructions to Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. and I move the Court to order Plaintiff to comply with them:

Date (at least) Instructions January 23, 2012 February 12, 2012

Request to incorporate my signature as authorized signatory.

February 1, 2012 February 12, 2012

Severance of all contacts with Venezuela and Cuba.


Request to change the branch where the account is lodged at from Caracas to Boca Raton, Florida, USA.

February 1, 2012 Direct contact without using Oppenheimer Caracas Branch Office as intermediary.

February 1, 2012 Stop all wire transfers out of the account until further notice.

25

February 1, 2012 Receive from Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. instructions as to how to give wire transfer instructions directly to Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.

February 1, 2012 Request to undergo full “Know your client” and “Know your client´s clients” inquiry

February 1, 2012 Request of not engaging Pimjo Trust CV in trade or business within United States of America, The Netherlands and New Zealand.

February 1, 2012 Authorization to Change Address. February 1, 2012 February 12, 2012

Request to receive the contractual terms of the account with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.


Request to assign to Pimjo Trust CV a temporary account officer as a direct contact while we conclude our internal audit


Request to identify who has authority to take trading decisions and who have trading authority in the account of Pimjo Trust CV.


Request to disclose and send via email existing trading uthorizations for the account of Pimjo Trust CV.


Request to disclose the levels of authorized risks in the account of Pimjo Trust CV.

February 1, 2012 Request to disclose the identities of the persons authorized as signatories in the account of Pimjo Trust CV since its inception status quo October 11, 2001 until January 31, 2012.


Request to determine goals and investmens strategies for the account of Pimjo Trust CV.

February 12, 2012 March 25, 2012

Request to obtain from John Gayle Pettus Jaso details of the investment strategy being applied to Pimjo Trust CV.

February 12, 2012

Request to determine risky assets within portfolio.


Request to issue credentials to access and log on to Pimjo Trust CV account at your website.

February 1, 2012 March 17, 2012

Notice and filing of W-8BEN and W-IMYs together with FEIN numbers.

February 12, 2012 Request to disclose all existing accounts of Pimjo Trust CV. February 12, 2012 Notice of revocation of any eventual existing trading authority of

John Gayle Pettus Jaso and Alfredo Quintana or Russ Dallen or any other broker or officer of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.

February 12, 2012 Request to issue new trading authority. February 12, 2012 Request of statements of account at UMB Bank NA, account

number 26201338505041. February 12, 2012 Request to disclose the authorized signatories in account at UMB

26

Bank NA, account number 26201338505041. February 12, 2012 Notice of revocation of all signatories in account at UMB Bank

NA, account number 26201338505041 March 13, 2012 March 19, 2012

Request of copy of letter sent by Redmond and accomplices on February 9, 2012.

March 25, 2012 Explanation of investments decisions involving more than US$ 1.500.000,00 made while the account was blocked.

March 28, 2012 Request to explain why Plaintiff is avoiding delivery of information regarding the account at UMB Bank NA, account number 26201338505041 after the explanations given by Ms. Michelle L. Sullivan, Vice President, Director of Fiduciary Compliance, IWM & Corporate Compliance Assessment Team, UMB Financial Corporation.

March 25, 2012 Request of explanation why so much liquid assets were held in the account ($ 4.104.536,55 in cash by the end of January 2012 which is 34,85% of Total Value Asset)

List of all wire transfers made. April 30, 2012 Request to report to me if there are any contacts between Pimjo

Trust CV account at Oppeneheimer & Co., Inc. and/or at Oppenheimer / Co., Inc. – UMB Bank NA account with Finter Bank Zurich (Claridenstrasse 35, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland), account 1.000779.01 of APV Foundation, IBAM: H37 0825 6100 0779 0. SWIFT FBZUCHZZ.

April 30, 2012 Request to mediate our apparent differences. The objectives of the mediation were: 1.- Solve once and for all the recognition erga omnes of my legitimate representation of Pimjo Trust CV. Logic precludes any other result. 2.- Deactivate your threat of an interpleader action which is the only possible action that benefits only the ex-directors who were ceased for having incurred in corruption practices within the meaning of the International Chamber of Commerce recommendations, by obstructing the mediation and arbitration proceedings. 3.- Repair economic damages caused by your actions to Pimjo Trust CV. 4.- Surrender all information - financial and otherwise - concerning Pimjo, S.A., Pimjo Trust CV and all accounts that are or were ever opened with Fanhestock & Co., Inc., Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., UMB Bank, NA or any other and actively cooperate in determining (i) whether or not the Oppenheimer Caracas Branch Managers mishandled resources of Pimjo, S.A. or Pimjo Trust CV, (ii) how

27

the accounts were used by your Caracas Branch Managers without authorizations, (iii) whether or not the accounts were connected with the transactions exposed in NYSE HEARING BOARD DECISION 06-82 of June 27, 2006, (iv) whether or not the accounts were connected with PEPs, (v) whether or not the accounts were connected with “tainted money” and (vi) whether or not the accounts were connected with any organization with political objectives. 5.- Surrender all information – financial and otherwise – concerning any account open in Venezuela banks by John Gayle Pettus Jaso in Banco del Sol or any other entity and actively cooperate in determining whether or not the Oppenheimer Caracas Branch Managers mishandled resources of Pimjo, S.A. or Pimjo Trust CV. 6.- Intervene your Caracas Branch Office, close your Caracas Branch Office and either reopen it under proper authorizations or leave having fulfilled with your tax obligations. Please, read well the clauses governing the mediation since there are certain attributes that might be of your interest. Please note that your next action must be cooperative in order to fulfill constructively “tit-for-tat”. It is my intention to transform this conflict into a constructive process and avoid destructive actions.

April 30, 2012 Invitation to Exert Preemptive Corrections. Please find attached the draft of the document to be delivered to the Ministry of Interior and Justice of Venezuela on Wednesday, May 3, 2012. You are hereby invited to make any comments, suggest ideas, and ask for corrections of facts, rationales or conclusions. Your comments will be received until Tuesday, May 1, 2012 at 24:00 hours. This document is being delivered to you since you reacted this morning cooperatively by granting a two week extension. Ex-directors are not being participants of this action because they have behaved unbecomingly. I hereby reiterate my offer to mediate our apparent differences. You

28

have nothing to lose. I also reiterate that you have rights to be treated fairly. If you consider any of my actions unbecoming, please address the issue directly with Carlos Ignacio Aguilar Lopez at [email protected].

April 30, 2012 Offer of legal opinion to be issued by independent New Zealand solicitor / barrister covering those issues required by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.

April 30, 2012 Offer of legal opinion to be issued by independent Dutch attorney covering those issues required by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.

May 4, 2012 Request for Answers to Questions to John Gayle Pettus Jaso. Please specify what value you are referring to. Please specify what assets are risky. Please specify unrecognized losses. Please specify what actions have you taken to avoid exposure to risky assets. Please specify your investment strategy. Please specify your investment guidelines. Please disclose your earnings and fees. Please send me the statements of all the accounts of Pimjo Trust CV of February, March and April 2012. What personal or professional experiences have you had with Mr. Toro that might support his so negative and denigratory opinion about you? Please disclose if the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro have referred to me as a dishonest person. Please disclose if the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro have imputed me of any crime, offense or wrongdoing ever in my professional life. Why Mr. Mendes de León reported a value of the portfolio of Pimjo S.A. before July 19, 2001 and you report so different numbers now? Who orchestrated the actions of July 19, 2001 and what was your participation? Please surrender and return to me the Participation Certificate issued in your name on July 19, 2001 for 24,999975% of Pimjo Trust CV. Who paid the fees and expenses billed by Amicorp and upon whose authorization? Who pays now the fees and expenses of Amircorp and upon whose authorization? Who did authorize the transfer of the assets from the account of Pimjo S.A. to the account of Pimjo Trust CV on October 11, 2001? Why did you open the account of Pimjo Trust CV having had actual knowledge that the transactions of July 19, 2011 had been

29

challenged by Mr. Grootkerk himself and I had personally confronted Mendes de León for his actions? Who did authorize Mendes de Leon, Dallen and you (hereinafter the “Oppenheiemer Caracas Managers”) to become limited partners of Pimjo Trust CV and to receive almost 25% participation interests each as limited partners of Pimjo Trust CV? Who did authorize the transfer of the ownership and control of the assets of Pimjo S.A. to Stichting Panthalassa? Who did own and control Stichting Panthalassa? Who did give you the advice to rupture the wishes of Mr. Grootkerk by altering the effects of his last will and giving away 75% of the wealth of Mr. Grootkerk to the Oppenheiemer Caracas Managers? Please, show me the authorization from Mr. Grootkerk that gave you authority to create Pimjo Trust CV and to transfer control and ownership of the portfolio of Pimjo S.A. to Stichting Panthalassa? Please, indicate when and where did the Oppenheimer Caracas Managers sign the “Quickclaim Deed”? Did any of the Oppenheimer Caracas Managers or others obtain benefits from the account of Pimjo S.A. or Pimjo Trust CV? Is there money missing from Pimjo S.A. or Pimjo Trust CV accounts? Who instructed you to open the account of Pimjo Trust CV on October 11, 2001 and what was the chain of supervision? Did the Oppenheimer Caracas Managers cleared their conflicts of interests because being brokers, limited partners of Pimjo Trust CV and later directors of Carisma Prima Limited? How much money did each of the Oppenheimer Caracas Managers earned in fees or otherwise while serving as brokers, limited partners of Pimjo Trust CV and later directors of Carisma Prima Limited? Please specify for each of Oppenheimer Caracas Managers his earnings by trading stock and by trading bonds and/or other instruments such as options, futures and the like. Were the accounts of Pimjo S.A. and/or Pimjo Trust CV ever overtraded (“churned”) for the personal benefit of the Oppenheimer Caracas Managers? Please disclose to me the actual address of record of all the accounts of Pimjo Trust CV. Please explain who hired the services of the USA address “Pimjo Trust CV. CCS 82586, P.O.Box 025323, Miami FL 33102, USA”? Please explain which cost unit of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. supports the payment of the services of the USA address “Pimjo Trust CV. CCS 82586, P.O.Box 025323, Miami FL 33102, USA”? Is the Office of the Chief Compliance Officer of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. aware of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. sending mail to the very same Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. against clients’ wishes? Please explain who else receive mail at that address and for what

30

purposes? Please explain how that address is connected with Pimjo Trust CV? Please surrender and deliver to me all statements in your possession of the accounts of Pimjo S.A. (account number ), Pimjo Trust CV (account number A140505833L52) and of the checking facility arranged by Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. with UMB Bank NA account number 26201338505041. Please explain what Mr. Art Lewis meant on February 13, 2012 with the following phrase: “I’m sure you know what is going on with this account; Allen Holeman has spoken to you in regards to this situation.” Please explain how many private meetings you had with the Redmonds and/or Alfonzo and/or Toro. Please explain the subject matters and items discussed during those meetings. Have you ever discussed with anyone the possibility of investing, directly or indirectly, in equity or bonds to be issued by Chocolates El Rey, C.A. or any related entity? Please disclose why the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro are dedicated to escalate this conflict. Please disclose why the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro refuse to mediate or arbitrate as they are obliged to. Have you ever discussed with anyone the possibility of giving money, directly or indirectly, to any PEP, candidate, ex-candidate, politician or political organization, NOGs, their instrumentalities or related entities? Have you ever sent Pimjo Trust CV money to Switzerland or any other fiscal paradises? List all of them, please. Please explain the reason why between 1/3 and ¼ of the value of the portfolio (between US$ 3.5 million and US$ 4.5 million) were permanently uninvested and kept in quasi-cash positions considering that the expenditures of Pimjo Trust CV in any full year never exceeded US$ 245,755.00? What event were you expecting that would trigger the investment of those liquid assets representing between 1/3 and ¼ of the value of the portfolio? Please give a full and detailed report of all wire transfers made from January 1 2007 until and including the last wire transfer made in 2011. Please explain why the file of Pimjo Trust CV was never updated during 9 years since its inception. Please explain why the Compliance Department of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. was not aware of all the changes in the structure of Carisma Prima Limited. Please explain how the Compliance Department of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. “discovered” that you were director of Fundación Pimjo

31

A.C. if you have never been appointed director of Fundación Pimjo A.C. Please explain how the Compliance Department of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. “discovered” that you were director of Carisma Prima Limited and what specific steps were taken. Please be specific as to the steps taken to trade and move the accounts. Please explain why you failed to communicate your office as director of Carisma Prima Limited to the Compliance Department of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. Please explain why you failed to disclose your interests to Carisma Prima Limited which were not registered in the Register of Interests of Carisma Prima Limited in New Zealand incurring in a violation to the law. Please explain why the W-8BEN of Pimjo Trust CV in 2001 disclosed the very same Pimjo Trust CV as the ultimate beneficiary. Please disclose how many file, documentation and compliance reviews were made to Pimjo Trust CV since its inception. Please explain how many W-8BEN of Pimjo Trust CV were filed and who signed them. Please explain upon whose authority and show supporting documentation allowing the Oppenheimer Caracas Managers to trade in the account of Pimjo Trust CV. Please indicate every person with past, present or attempted trading authority. Please disclose upon whose authority did you exercise powers in the accounts of Pimjo Trust CV. Please disclose who moved the account of Pimjo Trust CV on February 15, 2012 for circa US$ 1,500,000.00 and upon whose authority and supporting documentation. Please explain upon whose authority and show supporting documentation allowing the Oppenheimer Caracas Managers to transfer money out the account of Pimjo Trust CV. Please indicate every person with past, present or attempted authority to transfer money out of the account. Please disclose who instructed you to open the checking account of Pimjo Trust CV with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. clearing facility at UMB Bank, NA, Kansas. Please show the supporting documentation used to open the checking account of Pimjo Trust CV with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. clearing facility at UMB Bank, NA, Kansas. Please explain upon whose authority and show supporting documentation allowing the Oppenheimer Caracas Managers to transact businesses with the checking account of Pimjo Trust CV with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. clearing facility at UMB Bank, NA, Kansas. Please indicate every person with past, present or attempted authority to move the account. Please disclose any and all past and/or existing accounts of Pimjo

32

Trust CV anywhere in the world and surrender all documentation in your possession. Please disclose if you opened and/or operated and/or know of any account opened in the name of Pimjo Trust CV and/or Fundación Pimjo A.C. in Banco del Sol or any related entities in Venezuela or abroad. Please explain who authorized the investment policy and show the investment policy of Pimjo Trust CV. Please explain to me if any of the accounts of Pimjo Trust CV or Fundación Pimjo A.C. vía U. S. Dollars or via equivalent Bolivares had, at least, one contact with the hundreds of accounts and several of millions of US dollars referred to in the following paragraph of the NYSE Hearing Board Decision 06-82 of June 27, 2006. “As set forth below, during the period of 2002 through 2004, (the “relevant period”), Pettus, while employed as branch office manager at the Foreign branch office, failed to adequately supervise and follow-up on certain activities in his branch, including but not limited to, registered representatives and non-registered employees facilitating a large number of intra-account journals through both unrelated customer accounts as well as employees’ personal and employee-related accounts. These money movements occurred in hundreds of accounts and amounted to several million dollars. Pettus and 15 other Foreign branch office personnel took part in the money movements, which involved 31 employee or employee-related accounts. Pettus’ failure to adequately supervise these money movements contributed to the Firm’s failure to properly identify and report those transactions that were suspicious within the meaning of the Bank Secrecy Act.” Please disclose if those money movements in hundreds of accounts which amounted to several million dollars were related to illegal foreign exchange transactions between U.S. Dollars and Bolivars and what benefit did you obtain from them. Please explain step by step with full detail how you managed to effectuate wire transfers out of the accounts of Pimjo Trust CV including checking account of Pimjo Trust CV with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. clearing facility at UMB Bank, NA, Kansas. Please disclose who authorized the wire transfers to CERPE, CEDICE and Fe y Alegría disclosed in your email of November 30, 2011 and show the supporting documentation of such transactions. Please identify correctly who are CERPE, CEDICE and Fe y Alegria. Please disclose who the ultimate beneficiaries were of those wire transfers. Please identify correctly “venezuela competitive” (sic.) Please disclose if it is within Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.´s accepted practices to transfer without authorization money to an unrelated

33

party such as CERPE for the latter to donate that money to an unknown unrelated other party. Please disclose who authorized the wire transfer made to CEDICE and show supporting documents. Please identify the character of CEDICE under Ley para la Protección de la Autodeterminación y Soberanía Nacional.. Please disclose who authorized the wire transfer made to Fe y Alegria and show supporting documents. Please disclose when did you learn that the financial statements of Chocolates El Rey, C.A. had been presumably adultered with the intention to illegally obtain loans from banks in Venezuela and presumably by the Redmonds, Alfonzo and, perhaps, Toro. Please disclose if the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro have attempted to register their signatures as authorized signatories in any account of Pimjo Trust CV and show their supporting documentation. Please specify what title alleged to incorporate their respective signatures. Please disclose how many forms to incorporate their signatures do you had or have in your possession, who signed those forms and provide me with images of those forms. Please show me the image of the form signed by Alfonzo where he wrote that he was incorporating his signature provided and upon the condition that Toro incorporated his signature as well. Please disclose under what title and representation the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro attempted to register their signatures as authorized signatories in any account of Pimjo Trust CV and show supporting documentation. I demand from you that you do protect Alfredo Quintana. I make you personally liable of his wellbeing.

May 7, 2012 May 8, 2012

Request to file Interpleader Complaint.

May 15, 2012 Request for mediation at FINRA August 3, 2012 Request to approve my withdrawal as authorized signatory in the

terms presented. August 3, 2012 Request to be included as defendant in the Interpleader Complaint. August 5, 2012 Request to be treated fairly and equitably under OPPENHEIMER

HOLDINGS INC. OPPENHEIMER & CO. INC. CODE OF CONDUCT AND BUSINESS ETHICS FOR DIRECTORS, OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES (Revised April 2011): “You may not take unfair advantage of anyone through unethical or illegal measures, such as manipulation, concealment, abuse of privileged information, misrepresentation of material facts, or any other unfair practices.” (§ 7 A. Fair Dealing.)

August 7, 2012 Authorization to allow review of documentation submitted to Plaintiff by Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo as requested in the letter dated March 26, 2012.

34

August 8, 2012 Request to send copies of letters mentioned as exhibits in the draft of the Interpleader Complaint and copies of UF filings of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. (before Fahnestock & Co., Inc.) Caracas Office Branch Broker René F.C. Mendez de León (CRD # 331918), Caracas Office Branch Broker Russell M. Dallen, Jr. ( CRD # 2445026) and Caracas Office Branch Manager and Broker John Gayle Pettus Jaso (CRD # 2415914).

August 10, 2012 Truce and mediation. Humanitarian tit-for-tat. November 11, 2012 Request for mediation via Modria Mediation

91. And, in order to avoid doubts that I have acted transparently, please consider the disclosure made on April 19, 2012 to Plaintiff:

April 19, 2012 Disclosure of all my future actions. Regarding Carisma Prima Limited. On Friday, April 20th 2012, after the close of business in New York, USA, the limited offer dated Wednesday, April 14th 2012, to appoint Redmonds, Toro and Alfonzo as directors of Carisma Prima Limited shall expire. The offer made by Carisma Prima Limited on April 11th 2012 to grant them a limited power of attorney was both refused and later on revoked. I hereby disclose that I have approached the National Enforcement Unit of New Zealand to request authorization to appoint the Redmonds, Toro and Alfonzo as directors of Carisma Prima Limited even under a regime of unanimity and safeguard against directors deadlocks. Regarding Pimjo Trust CV. On Friday, 20th April 2012, at 1500 Caracas time, I will visit the offices of Jorge M. Redmond Schlageter, at La Urbina, Caracas, Venezuela. The main objective is to start the mandatory mediation proceedings contemplated in the current Deed of Creation of Pimjo Trust CV. Further actions are intended to take place at CEDCA in order to compell the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro to solve this conflict via mediation and arbitration. Indeed, I will offer them to reduce the mandatory period of 80 hours to 8 hours and to submitt the matter to arbitration to be solved in 48 hours.

35

Therefore, be it known by all parties involved that this conflict about the authority over and control of the account of Pimjo Trust CV at Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. may be solved definitively and permanently by mediation and arbitration in 72 hours. It is my bona fide belief that the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro, at least, might or possibly be trying to hide actions, at least, involving the use of US$ 35,633.33. In order to do that, Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro are willing force Pimjo Trust CV to spend between US$ 600,000.00 to US$ 1,800,000.00 in legal fees and expenses pursuing the interpleader action. Even if they were directors today of Carisma Prima Limited, they are actually and expressly prohibited to allow this interpleader action to take place, not because of the action itself but, because they had the duty to protect the assets of Pimjo Trust CV, They have the fiduciary duty to avoid spending this money in the interpleader action. The difference of US$ 35,633.33 to US$ 1,800,000.00 is 192,235%. Worse of: the Redmonds, Alfonzo and Toro have, cruelly impeded that the actual beneficiaries of the grants and gifts of Pimjo Trust CV – even a woman alledgedly in an hospice in Sarasota, Florida, USA – receive the contributions. After the actions to be taken in Caracas, Venezuela, I will come back to USA and, on behalf of Pimjo Trust CV, I will file a claim before Financial Industry Regulatory Authority on the grounds that the interpleader action is being used inadequately and, possibly, with the objective of impeding my access to the information regarding the account at UMB Bank NA. Regarding Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. branch office and branch manager in Caracas, Venezuela. I will file a petition for investigation of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. activities as an unauthorized branch of a foreign brokerage house within Venezuela, allegedly and knowingly using a certain legal person known as BRISBANE, MENDES DE LEON, PETTUS Y ASOCIADOS REPRESENTANTES DE OPPENHEIMER & CO. INC., sociedad mercantil, inscrita en el Registro Mercantil de la Circunscripción Judicial del Distrito Federal y Estado Miranda, en fecha 27 de mayo de 1974, bajo el N° 147, Tomo 25-B. I will file petitions for investigation of Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. activities in Venezuela connected with eventual lack of diligence in the application of compliance standards of vigilance to prevent legitimation of capitals and other objectives.

36

The petitions will be filed with the Superintendencia de Inversiones Extranjeras, the Superintendencia de Instituciones del Sector Bancario, Superintendencia Nacional de Valores, Comisión de Administración de Divisas and Oficina Nacional Antidrogas. No action will be taken with Servicio Nacional Integrado de Administración Aduanera y Tributaria since it will preclude Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. To protect your clients’ assets, I hereby request to disconnect all communications links and sofware access points between your offices in Caracas and wherever your mainframe is located. Regarding Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. I will file a claim before Financial Industry Regulatory Authority covering all the aforementioned events, actions and omissions and the violation of Oppenheimer Code of Conduct and Business Ethics and I will request an investigation by the New York Stock Exchange LLC concerning the abovementioned events. Regarding Chocolates El Rey, C.A. and since all these matter has its origin and inception in the allegedly lack of character of just one and only single and sole individual to manage the funds of a nonprofit organization because presumably involved in knowingly adulteration of financial statements to obtain loans from financial institutions and other grievances as fully explained in Aviso al Comisario de Chocolates El Rey, C.A. dated March 23, 2012, a petition for action will be filed with Superintendencia de Instituciones del Sector Bancario and Fondo de Protección Social de los Depósitos Bancarios. I hereby disclose that as the Compliance Officer of Aguilar & Aguilar Limited, I have already shared twice information concerning the eventual and to-be-determined-crimes against financial institutions with Mercantil, S. A., Banco Universal, Banco Caroní, Venezolano de Crédito, S. A., Banco Universal, Banco Exterior, BANESCO, Banco Universal and VENECREDIT, Bank and Trust Ltd. Actions at Superintendencia de Instituciones del Sector Bancario and Fondo de Protección Social de los Depósitos Bancarios are aimed to demand information as to what actions have the aforementioned banks taken as a consequence of facts learnt from another Compliance Officer.

37

Regarding Jorge Redmond Schlageter, Astrid Kristina Redmod Horn, Rafael Alfonzo Hernández and Germán Toro Arévalo and in accordance with the exisiting Masters Agreements and Deeds of Creation and Constitutions in force, a mediation request will be made in order to resolve the issues of eventual slander, defamation, damages and civil liability. Upon failure to accept mediation and arbitration proceedings, I will file a petition for investigation of activities which might be in violation of Ley de Defensa de la Soberanía Política y Autodeterminación Nacional for allegedly using funds of a nonprofit foreign organization for objectives which will be determined in such investigation. It is my understanding that Ministerio del Poder Popular para Relaciones Interiores y Justicia. Regarding Jorge Redmond Schlageter and Astrid Kristina Redmod Horn and in accordance with the existing Master Agreement, a mediation offer – instead of criminal actions - will be presented in order to solve the damages caused by a meeting allegedly convened by Ms. Astrid Kristina Redmond Horn in which, allegedly, she qualified me as an unbecoming person in terms later allegedly repeated by Luis Ugalde, s.j. and which caused that the said Ugalde refused my proposal of him to appoint two or three or four independent individuals to whom granting them the power and authority to move the account of Pimjo Trust CV for humanitarian reasons. Regarding Germán Toro Arévalo and in accordance with the existing Master Agreement, a mediation request will be made in order to resolve the issues of damages and civil liability.

92. With respect to the motion to request an extension of time for the deadline set for February 19, 2013 I propose to the Court the ideas expressed in the following paragraphs.

93. Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, originally a Dutch Civil Law (Continental Law) limited partnership, and as Trustee for the Xavier Trust acting in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV is yet to complete the conversion of Pimjo Trust CV from a foreign entity into a Florida Limited Liability Company thus seemingly securing federal jurisdiction for the Court over this case.

94. On June 28, 2012, Carisma Prima Limited as trustee of the Xavier Trust and of the Joseph trust adopted a unanimous resolution of its shareholders and directors and the Partners of Pimjo Trust CV (attached as Exhibits “8” and “9”) with the following resolutions:

38

“RESOLVED: to authorize the conversion of Pimjo Trust CV into a Florida Limited Liability Company in accordance with § 608.439, F.S. with the name of Pimjo Trust [LLC] and - simultaneously and without solution of continuity - to consolidate all partnership interests held by Carisma Prima Limited as trustee of the Xavier Trust as limited partner and all partnership interests held by Carisma Prima Limited as trustee of the Joseph Trust as general partner into Carisma Prima Limited as trustee of the Joseph Trust which is and will become the sole member of Pimjo Trust LLC.

RESOLVED: to authorize Mr. Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo to do all and every acts necessary to complete the conversion of Pimjo Trust CV into Pimjo Trust LLC.

RESOLVED: to appoint Mr. Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo as Manager of Pimjo Trust LLC.

RESOLVED: to continue with the mediation proceedings initiated by Luis Alejandro Aguilar Pardo on April 11th 2012 and demand, among other issues, indemnification, reimbursement and compensation for expenses incurred during these proceedings to those responsible of the present events.”

95. The aforementioned resolutions were not carried out because the then engaged law firm representing Pimjo Organization considered that it was not advisable for several reasons.

96. The conversion of Pimjo Trust CV into Pimjo Trust LLC was a change devised in 2009 and it does not constitute any fraudulent change to anyone.

97. From an economic point of view, it seems beneficial to all to proceed with this conversion thus securing jurisdiction of this Court.

98. I spoke with counsel for Plaintiff and I think that he mentioned that he would not object to this step but asked me to delay taking this action until after the issue of jurisdiction is resolved by the Court. I disagree because this may be a fundamental issue to be considered by the Court. However, on January 31, 2012, counsel for Plaintiff sent me an email stating that “Oppenheimer does not take any position with regard to your proposal.”

99. The conversion of Pimjo Trust CV into a Florida limited liability company does not entail any material change in the taxation of United States of America sourced income of Pimjo Trust CV and/or Pimjo Organization.

100. I enclose a copy of the Complaint as Exhibit 10.

WHEREFORE, I respectfully request that the Court grant this motion, as well as such other and further relief as may be just and proper among which (i) to take the necessary actions to protect the constitutional rights of those that might be considered as involved in actions to be heard or considered in criminal jurisdiction, (ii) the giving notice, if appropriate, to the Office of the Federal District Attorney, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of State of the United States of America, (iii) to order all parties involved to solve the underlying problems

39

via mandatory and compulsory mediation and subsequent arbitration as contemplated in the Deed of Creation of Pimjo Trust CV which is the only way in which a communion of the public interests and public policies of the nations involved and the private and legitimate interests of the non-public entities and natural persons also involved in this case may be solved with balance, justice and in a civilized manner in which reason and equity may be served.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

I hereby certify and declare under penalty of perjury that I have mailed a copy of the Notice of Motions , a copy of this Affirmation in Support of Motions and copies of its Exhibits to Michael H. Gibson, Esq. , attorney for Plaintiff Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., 230 Park Avenue, Suite 1130, New York, New York 10169 to Satterlee Stephens Burke & Burke on the 5th day of February, 2013 and to Carisma Prima Limited as Trustee of the Joseph Trust acting in its capacity as General / Managing Partner of Pimjo Trust CV, originally a Dutch Civil Law (Continental Law) limited partnership, and as Trustee for the Xavier Trust acting in its capacity as Limited Partner of Pimjo Trust CV at Level 31, Vero Centre, 48 Shortland Street, Auckland 1010, New Zealand to my own attention as the Sole Director and Managing Director of Carisma Prima Limited and Attorney-in-Fact of Pimjo Trust CV.

Dated: Boca Raton, Florida, February 5th, 2013.

_____________________________________________

Signature

Luis-Alejandro Aguilar-Pardo

3801 Bridgewood Drive,

Boca Raton, FL 33434, U. S. A.

P. 561-251.7697. F. 786-228.00559. Email [email protected]

40

affirmation in support of motions (1)to intervene … · is not technically necessary since only...

Documents