Kachroo Legal Services Stanford Update October 23rd 2013

STANFORD UPDATE OCTOBER 23rd 2013

TO ALL SEC CLIENTS
TO ALL SFA CLIENTS


Dear Stanford Clients:

We write to update you with important information regarding the claim against the SEC and


ZELAYA V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

As you may be aware, United States District Court Judge Robert N. Scola recently issued an order granting the Government’s second motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ complaint. This ruling comes despite the historic victory previously achieved in surviving the Government’s first motion to dismiss. The result of the order is that the lower court has made a final determination on the entire case and as such KLS is now in a position to appeal the entire case to the United States Court of Appeals for authoritative resolution of all issues.

To that end, KLS has filed a notice of appeal earlier this month, and will submit its full appeal brief in November. KLS will of course keep all clients up to date with developments in the case as they arise, including the approximate timeline of the appeal.


STANFORD FURTHER ACTIONS

In accordance with our previous updates, we would like to make sure that all clients are aware of progress with the Dallas receiver. By now, clients should have received:

1) A notice of Determination
2) A Certification Notice.


If You Have Already Received A Certification Notice

For those of you who have already received a notice directly, it is important to let us know as soon as possible so that we can assist you in processing your claim. Please forward any and all paperwork you have received from the Receiver. Please also sign the attached confirmation in order for us to be able to deal with the Receiver on your behalf directly.


If You Have Not Yet Received A Certification Notice

If you have not yet received a notice, we can check on the current status of your case on your behalf. To enable us to do this, please sign the attached confirmation. Please also be vigilant for any notifications sent to you directly by email as there are strict deadlines to respond.


If You Are Not Yet a Stanford Further Actions (SFA)

Client If you have not yet signed a retainer agreement with KLS, time is running out to submit and process these claims. If you would like us to deal with these claims to the receiver on your behalf, please sign the enclosed authorization form and or contact us with any queries you may have. We can then forward you our standard retainer letter.


SALE OF STANFORD INVESTORS’ CLAIMS

KLS is being solicited by a number of funds that appear to have increased their initial offers to acquire claims from Stanford investors to between 10 and 20 cents on the dollar (i.e. 10-20% of their claimed value). If any of our clients have an interest in pursuing such an offer, please advise us directly so we can facilitate discussions with these funds.

Very truly yours,

Gaytri D. Kachroo
Kachroo Legal Services, P.C.


Read More: http://sivg.org.ag/topic224.html 


 For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum http://sivg.org.ag/

Kachroo Legal Services Update July 30th

Dear KLS Stanford SEC Clients,

We write to update you on the current status of this case.

1. Order of Limited Discovery: As you are aware from our previous updates, in February 2013, the Court through the Magistrate Judge had ordered the US Government to provide discovery to Plaintiffs including disclosure of documents and information on a limited basis while a second Motion to Dismiss was outstanding. Since that time, the Government has repeatedly argued about the quantity and nature of the information they are prepared to give us, which has required us to go back to the court several times, for both hearings upon filing a number of motions and responses.
2. Discovery Orders and Multiple Hearings on Discovery: As you can see from the attached documents, KLS has participated in and requested several hearings in order to obtain the discovery initially ordered by the magistrate judge. Each of the times we have gone back to Court, we have been successful in persuading the Judge to allow discovery to proceed - despite the Government's repeated objections.
3. Stay of Proceedings: Only a few days ago, and amidst our progress to date, the District Court Judge in the case has just handed down an order staying all proceedings as he prepares to provide a ruling on the second motion to dismiss.

We will advise all clients as soon as this happens, but in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions.

The KLS Stanford Team. .


For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit the Stanford International Victims Group - SIVG official forum http://sivg.org.ag/

KLS Stanford Update March 2013

Stanford Update March 2013 

 Dear Stanford Clients: This update will summarize recent events in the Stanford matters over the past several weeks.

 SEC Litigation 

 In our last update, we notified you that the magistrate judge in our SEC class action denied the Government's request to stay all discovery. We are summarizing here the outcome of the discovery hearing which was held in Miami on February 14, 2013. One of the key hurdles to overcome in an action against the Government is the discretionary function exception. The magistrate made clear that this hurdle has been overcome and the court had already ruled on the sovereign immunity issue. The magistrate also held that "it is not obvious that [the Government's second motion to dismiss] will succeed." A copy of this ruling is attached for your review. Following this ruling, we have moved forward with discovery and we continue to wait for the district court to rule on the Government's second motion to dismiss.

 In view of the delays caused by the Government's motion to stay discovery, we requested that the Court push back certain pre-trial and trial deadlines to allow us adequate time to pursue the discovery required to prove our case. We are happy to report that the Court granted our request and pushed back discovery deadlines to afford us this opportunity, which also resulted in a new trial date set for April 7, 2014.

 Potential NAFTA Action

 We have also recently become aware of a potential new action being pursued by Peter Morgenstern on behalf of Mexican investors. Apparently, Mr. Morgenstern intends on filing a private arbitration against the United States under the arbitration provisions of NAFTA. It appears that participation in this arbitration by Mexican investors may result in your inability to participate in our SEC class action. Please note that there are three key issues to keep in mind as you consider joining this litigation: (1) the timeline and pressure being imposed on investors to make this decision appears unfair; (2) as far as we know, such an action has never previously been taken and therefore no precedent exists for it; and (3) as far as your SEC action is concerned, you may be precluded from participating in the class action and may be considered an opting out of the class action in which you have already invested time, money and resources.

 First, we do not know of any successful action against the United States for failure to provide fair and equitable treatment to foreign investors under circumstances similar to the Stanford Ponzi scheme. This is an untested and speculative theory for recovery which could disqualify you from participating in our action. Our action has already overcome the key initial hurdle and has a defined path towards a successful verdict. Moreover, discovery in arbitration is far more limited than discovery in our pending action. We know from our case that, in order to overcome the Government's position on these claims, extensive discovery is necessary. We do not believe that the procedural intricacies of a NAFTA international arbitration, including the limited means of discovery, provide the best avenue for recovery against the Government. We believe the risk of being disqualified from participating in our SEC action outweighs the potential for obtaining a successful judgment against the Government in the NAFTA international arbitration.

 Claims 

 In the meantime, we have been working with many of our clients who have received determination notices from the Stanford Receiver regarding the claim amount. We have assisted our clients in objecting to those determinations if they were less than the total claimed amount, and we will continue to assist any and all clients who would like us to review their claims determination and provide advice. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit:

http://sivg.org.ag/

The Stanford International Victims Group Forum

KLS Update February 2013

Dear Stanford Clients:

This update is in response to the questions and concerns of many of our clients regarding the
Receiver’s proposed interim distribution, as well as several other matters.

The Receiver’s Proposed Distribution

You may have received a notice indicating that you must complete a certification form within six weeks. However, the six week time period does not begin until after the Court approves the Receiver’s request to make an interim distribution. As soon as the Court approves the request, then you will have six weeks to complete the certification form. For many of you, we will be completing these requirements on your behalf. We do not anticipate the Court approving the request for several months. Several objections have been filed in opposition to the distribution, and there may be more objections filed within the next few weeks. These objections were filed by various parties, mostly defendants in lawsuits brought by the Receiver, claiming that they should be included in the distribution. It will take several weeks, if not months, for the Court to resolve these objections. We will keep you updated on this process and notify you as soon as the Court enters a ruling on the proposed distribution plan.

The February 14, 2013 Discovery Hearing in the SEC Class Action

We continue to vigorously prosecute the case against the Government for the SEC’s failure to take enforcement action against the Ponzi scheme. As we mentioned in past updates, the Government filed a second motion to dismiss the Complaint, raising new arguments that it had not previously raised. We filed a strong opposition to the motion, and the issues are now fully briefed and awaiting a ruling from the Court. We have also been moving forward with discovery and we filed a motion to compel the Government to disclose more information. The Government filed a motion seeking a stay on discovery until after the Court rules on the motion to dismiss.


The Court set a hearing on these motions on February 14, and we traveled to Miami, Florida last week to attend and argue at the hearing.

We are happy to report that the Court denied the Government’s motion to stay discovery. The Court ruled that the Government will have to begin responding to discovery in this case and cannot completely obstruct the process by staying discovery altogether. The Court also ruled on our motion to compel discovery by compelling the Government to produce certain preliminary information and requiring the Government to produce a witness to testify at a deposition regarding the allegations of our Complaint. We look forward to taking this deposition and will continue to update you regarding the status of this case.

The Antiguan Claim Process

As our SFA clients know, the Antiguan Liquidator set up a claim process and we submitted claims to the Liquidator on behalf of all of our SFA clients. At the time we submitted those claims, the Liquidator had not yet set up a deadline for submission of the claims. However, now the Liquidator has set a March 31, 2013 deadline. We encourage our non-SFA clients to review the procedure for submitting claims and make sure you submit your claims before the deadline. If any of you want to become SFA clients so that we can complete the process on your behalf, please do not hesitate to contact us. More information about the claims’ process requirements can be found at:

http://www.sibliquidation.com/claims-administration/

As always, if you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact us.

For a full and open debate on the Stanford Receivership visit:

http://sivg.org.ag/ 

The Stanford International Victims Group Forum

Statement from Kachroo Legal Services

We are preparing another update specifically addressing the status of our lawsuit against the government and all the work we have conducted after the Court denied the government’s motion to dismiss. However, to clarify, the Court’s order was an initial ruling that allowed our lawsuit to go forward into the next stage, which is where we attempt to prove our claims against the government. It was a groundbreaking ruling because all other lawsuits were dismissed immediately upon filing and were not allowed to go forward. We are now in the next stage of the litigation where we seek documents from the other side in order to prove our claims. Our update will address the status of this stage of the litigation. If you have any other questions, please feel free to contact me directly. I am happy to speak with you via email or we can discuss over the phone. You can reach me (212) 372-8939.

The Court’s order was an initial ruling that allowed our lawsuit to go forward into the next stage, which is where we attempt to prove our claims against the government. It was a groundbreaking ruling because all other lawsuits were dismissed immediately upon filing and were not allowed to go forward. We are now in the next stage of the litigation where we seek documents from the other side in order to prove our claims.

And how long does that procedure may take

The deadline to complete this stage of the litigation (called “discovery”) is March 1, 2013. There are a few other stages of the litigation after discovery, during which each side will argue that a judgment should be entered in their favor and the case should not proceed to a trial. If the court disagrees with both sides, then it will go to a full trial. The trial date is now set for October 21, 2013.

KLS has requested that we post the following on the blog for your information

“KLS continues to file administrative claims against the SEC on behalf of Stanford victims in order to have such investors included in the Stanford class action against the SEC. KLS on your behalf will likely face challenges to your inclusion in the class of litigants represented on the basis of the timeliness of your claim. However, KLS believes there are strong arguments to support later filings of such SEC claims. If you have filed a claim with a different attorney and need to file an amended claim or if you have never filed a claim with the SEC, please contact KLS immediately at the following address: info@kachroolegal.com”

A TIMELY CALL FOR HARMONY AMONG VICTIMS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS

Dear Stanford Investors and Attorneys of Stanford Investors:

We at KLS, and the managers of this blog "Stanford's Forgotten Victims", are very pleased that we have been able to overcome the sovereign immunity hurdle, and the U.S. Government’s motion to dismiss in this case.

We recognize, however, that this is an opportunity not only for KLS and its clients but for all investors who have filed, or attempted to file claims with the SEC. As you know, we have filed our case as a class action. As such any victory we obtain is a victory for all class members (all those who have filed claims with the SEC).

Along with KLS, there were many other attorneys who did attempt to file claims with the SEC on behalf of their clients. Regardless of the rancor that may have existed between attorneys and investors in the past, now is not the time to dwell on conflict, but to breed the kind of bond that can assist this case in going forward with the kind of strength we want to engender, with seriousness, collegiality, fairness, and propriety as our guide.

Investor recovery should be first and foremost for all investors and all attorneys of investors. As such, we would like to encourage all investors (who have filed with the SEC in any manner whatsoever) or their attorneys who have done so, to contact us so that we can determine a common strategy forward to benefit all investors.

We thank you all for your support, and your criticism. After all, we believe, all the feedback we have received has assisted us, and culminated in the formulation of our initial victory in this case!

Best wishes,
Gaytri Kachroo


 
Dr. Gaytri D. Kachroo
PRINCIPAL
KLS-Kachroo Legal Services, P.C.
225R Concord Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02138
Direct: 1-617-864-0755
Facsimile: 1-617-864-1125
http://www.kachroolegal.com

Stanford Victims in Antigua Praise Latest Development

Source: Caribarena

Antigua St. John’s - Stanford victims in Antigua are calling the historic victory over the United States Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) a landmark achievement and “the best news the victims have had in three-and-a-half years.”

On Friday, a US Court ruled that the SEC must defend a negligence claim contending that the Commission had failed to act appropriately after concluding at least four times before 2008 that R. Allen Stanford was indeed operating a Ponzi scheme.

“We have made legal history with this latest ruling and I encourage all Stanford victims to go to http://stanfordsforgottenvictims.blogspot.com/ to read how they can join this lawsuit and for the first time have a chance of recovering their stolen money,” said spokesperson for the Stanford International Victims Group (SIVG) Kate Freeman.

She added that the achievement of attorney Gaytrie Kachroo is the first for any lawyer in finding a legal solution to the Discretionary Rule that has long protected the SEC from legal sanction when it failed to act accordingly.

“There are thousands of Stanford Victims that need to be made aware of what we have done here and also be given the chance of joining Kachroo Legal Services on this journey,” Freeman said.

The victims now have a clear passage to continue forward with the claim against SEC examiners, according to the ruling.

The lawsuit being carried by Kachroo claims that the SEC had a “nondiscretionary duty” to report Stanford to the Securities Investor Protection Corp. (SIPC) in the USA. The landmark judgment was filed on September 7.

“Gaytri Kachroo was originally contacted by me and another victim and asked to work on the behalf of the Stanford International Victims group to sue the American Government and the SEC. All other lawyers said this could not be done due to the “Discretionary Rule” that protects the US government and its departments,” Freeman said.

The attorney is reported as saying on Friday in a www.bloomberg.com report that the judge’s decision was the first to overcome the SEC’s “sovereign immunity.”

“The ruling handed down… is a bold statement and a warning to the government: if you fail to carry out your statutory obligations to protect the public against wrongdoing with massive repercussions to the investing public, you will be held liable,” Kachroo said in a statement.

According to the judgment, “…The Securities and Exchange Commission was obligated to report Stanford’s company to the Securities Investor Protection Corp. This obligation to report was not discretionary because the controlling statute mandates that the report be made.”

The SEC may use the next stage of the litigation to raise the argument that it had not concluded before 2009 that Stanford was running a Ponzi scheme, despite the plaintiff’s claims.

It is also being reported that the SEC shied away from investigating the case because of the clear complexities involved, as they reportedly preferred to investigate more slam-dunk cases due to work evaluation purposes.

The case is Zelaya v. United States, 11-cv-62644, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida (Miami).

KLS - Stanford Update #17

HISTORIC VICTORY FOR STANFORD VICTIMS IN ZELAYA v. UNITED STATES

Miami, Florida - September 7, 2012

Federal District Court Judge Robert N. Scola, Jr. handed down an historic opinion against the U.S. Government today, holding the Securities and Exchange Commission potentially liable for billions of dollars for not notifying the Securities Investor Protection Corporation when it had information about Allen Stanford’s Ponzi scheme. In the wake of the Madoff and Stanford Ponzi schemes and the dozens of lawsuits filed against the Government for the SEC’s failure to protect the public, today marks the first time that a lawsuit survived the Government’s motion to dismiss.

The case is being fought by Dr. Gaytri Kachroo and her law firm, Kachroo Legal Services, P.C., on behalf of thousands of Stanford victims. KLS filed a class action against the government, alleging that the SEC knew Stanford was operating a multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme and “sat and watched the scheme grow for years, as it ballooned into a $7 billion enterprise, second only to Bernard Madoff as the largest Ponzi scheme in history.”

In an unprecedented decision denying the Government’s efforts to dismiss the lawsuit, the Court held today that the SEC can be held liable for failing to act appropriately when put on notice that an investment advisor is operating a Ponzi scheme. To achieve this important and unprecedented goal on behalf of its clients, KLS crafted an argument not raised in any of the prior complaints against the government: that the SEC violated a statutory duty to notify SIPC that an investment advisor was in or approaching financial difficulty.

Dr. Gaytri Kachroo is proud of her firm’s achievement: “This decision reaffirms the SEC’s fundamental mission. For decades, the SEC has relied on sovereign immunity to avoid the consequences of its inaction in the face of Ponzi schemes. The ruling handed down today is a bold statement and a warning to the Government: If you fail to carry out your statutory obligations to protect the public against wrong doing with massive repercussions to the investing public, you will be held liable.”

Victims of the Stanford Ponzi scheme have not only lost billions of dollars as a result of the SEC’s failure to put an end to the scheme, but they have also lost hope that they will see any recovery, as the SEC- appointed receiver has recovered only pennies on the dollar at this point, and has not made any distribution to victims. “We are in an unprecedented position, and are thrilled to succeed in this first major hurdle in the case. Today, our small firm accomplished what thousands of lawyers and consultants employed by the Receiver could not do in over three years: restore hope for the victims of Stanford’s Ponzi scheme.”

Kachroo Legal Services represents individuals and corporate entities in business and securities litigation, companies and their Boards in ethics and audit compliance, funds and investors in their government and SEC relations, and in general corporate law and general counsel services for companies both domestic and international. Dr. Gaytri Kachroo is the attorney for Madoff whistleblower Harry Markopolos.

Lawsuit against U.S. over Stanford Ponzi scheme can go ahead

Source:Joseph Ax (Reuters)

(Reuters) - A lawsuit claiming U.S. securities regulators were negligent in failing to respond earlier to Allen Stanford's $7 billion Ponzi scheme can go forward for now, a federal judge ruled in Florida on Friday.

U.S. District Judge Robert Scola rejected the U.S. government's motion to dismiss the case, according to court documents. The government claimed the court did not have jurisdiction over the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's handling of the Stanford case.

The purported class action complaint, filed by two investors who say they lost a combined $1.65 million when the scheme collapsed, claims the SEC knew as early as 1997 that Stanford was likely operating a Ponzi scheme but took no action against him until 2009. The SEC had a duty to notify the Securities Investor Protection Corp (SIPC) of Stanford's fraud, the lawsuit asserts.

The SIPC, funded by the brokerage industry, handles investors' claims when brokers fail and has overseen liquidation proceedings for Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme and the collapse of MF Global.

In his ruling, Scola found that the SEC was required to act if it concluded that Stanford was running a Ponzi scheme.

"When the Securities and Exchange Commission believes that a broker or dealer is in or approaching financial difficulty then it must report that broker/dealer to the Securities Investor Protection Corporation," he wrote.

Scola did, however, dismiss the lawsuit's second claim, which faulted the SEC for not considering whether to deny Stanford's company's annual registration as an investment advisor. The judge agreed with the government's argument that such decisions are entirely within the SEC's discretion.

The government's argument that the SEC did not know Stanford was running a Ponzi scheme will be addressed if and when it moves for summary judgment, the judge said.

A similar $18.7 million lawsuit against the U.S. was tossed by a Texas federal judge last year for lack of jurisdiction.

In a March 2010 report, the SEC's inspector general found the SEC was aware since 1997 that Stanford was likely running a Ponzi scheme and that numerous agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Justice Department and the Secret Service, all probed Stanford's operations at one time or another.

An SEC spokeswoman declined to comment on Friday's ruling.

"This is a historic ruling showing that the SEC can finally be held accountable for not notifying SIPC," said Gaytri Kachroo, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.

Stanford was sentenced in June to 110 years in prison for bilking investors with fraudulent CDs issued by Stanford International Bank, his bank in Antigua.

The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages and certification of the class action.

The case is Zelaya et al. v. United States, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, No. 11-62644.

(Reporting by Joseph Ax; editing by Carol Bishopric)

KLS Beats the SEC Motion to Dismiss!!!!

FANTATIC NEWS FOR ALL VICTIMS GAYTRI KACHROO HAS BEAT THE SEC MOTION TO DISMISS HER CASE....WE ARE TAKING THE SEC TO COURT!

Zelaya Order MTD

KACHROO LEGAL SERVICES, P.C. UPDATE

KACHROO LEGAL SERVICES, P.C. 
Stanford Update: July 2012

Dear Stanford Clients: We here at KLS continue our efforts every day to maximize your recovery and hold responsible parties liable for the Stanford Ponzi scheme. We remain confident and focused on the efforts we are taking to obtain a real recovery for Stanford victims. This letter will update you on the status of the various actions we are taking.  

The SEC Lawsuit
In our lawsuit against the SEC, we are waiting on a ruling from the judge on the SEC’s motion to dismiss the case. This is the same status as our last update, and we again will let you know as soon as we have a ruling on the motion. In the meantime, the parties have exchanged initial disclosures identifying various individuals likely to have relevant information about the case. We are also preparing discovery requests to serve on the SEC, including document requests and interrogatories, seeking all available information regarding their investigations of the Stanford entities and their failure to take enforcement action to end the Ponzi scheme. We expect the SEC will oppose responding to any discovery prior to the Court’s ruling on the motion to dismiss, and we may have to file a motion requesting that the Court compel their discovery responses. We will continue to keep you updated on the status of this litigation. Please note that we continue to file claims with the SEC to include as many of you who wish to be included in the class supporting and represented by this lawsuit. Please do not hesitate to contact us individually if you have not yet filed an administrative claim with the SEC through KLS and want to be included.  

The Claims Process
Currently, both the Antiguan Liquidator and the Dallas Receiver have initiated a claims process. There is no coordination between the two processes, and we must file claims in both jurisdictions. For our Stanford Further Actions clients, we have been diligently preparing and filing your claims. You will receive a full copy of your finalized claim when it is filed. We have communicated with a number of you on these claims and will continue to reach out to you in order to finalize your claims. If you have any questions about the claims process, please feel free to contact us.

IF YOU HAVE NOT SIGNED UP FOR OUR STANFORD FURTHER ACTIONS PROGRAM AND PAID THE REQUIRED FEES, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT WE WILL NOT BE FILING ANY CLAIMS ON YOUR BEHALF AND IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO FILE YOUR CLAIMS.  

The Dallas Receivership
The Receiver in Dallas continues to cost the Stanford victims millions of dollars in fees and expenses as his team of attorneys and consultants operate the receivership estate. There are very few assets left for the Receiver to liquidate, and he appears to be focusing solely on his various clawback and fraudulent transfer cases. The Receiver should be able to reach settlements in these actions. However, based on his actions to date, we have very little confidence in him and the team of attorneys he has working for him. We believe the Receiver and his attorneys and consultants value recovering their own fees above any recovery for the victims. We have complained about this to the Court and the Receiver on multiple occasions. We are currently conducting a comprehensive review of all actions taken by the Receiver to determine whether the Receiver should be disgorged of the profits he and his staff earned over the past several years while bringing very little net benefit to the estate.  

Other Potential Lawsuits
We believe there may be potential lawsuits to bring against various banks and financial institutions through which Stanford may have laundered funds. These banks may be liable if they assisted the Stanford Ponzi scheme, whether knowingly or not. In the next few weeks, we will schedule a conference call to discuss these potential actions with you. In particular, we are considering pursuing a case against the Toronto-Dominion Bank based on investor requests. We would like to schedule a call with all of those interested in pursuing such a lawsuit later next week and will send around the call in information and date to those interested in supporting such action on our part.  

Negotiations with Funds to Sell Claims
We have spent several months negotiating with certain hedge funds regarding the potential sale of your claims to a fund for a discounted price. However, prices offered by these funds are a fraction of the price (in the single digits when we believe that a plausible price is 1/3 of the claim amounts or close to that amount) we believe the claims are worth, and we do not believe it is in the best interests of our clients to sell their claims at this price. We believe these funds are playing hardball. We would be happy to sell your claims at the price currently offered, but we do not recommend selling your claims at this price. The negotiations are at a standstill at this point.  

SIPC Coverage
As you may have recently heard, in the lawsuit brought by the SEC against SIPC to compel SIPC coverage, the Court ruled that SIPC cannot be compelled to act. We assume the SEC will appeal this ruling, but for the time being, the prospect of SIPC coverage is dim. It is unfortunate that the Stanford Victims Coalition expended so much time and money on pursuing this.  

Stanford Criminal Conviction
The recent criminal conviction of Allen Stanford should help the government’s claim to recover the $300 million in assets frozen overseas. Currently, the United States and Antiguan governments are fighting for recovery of these funds. We are hopeful that, whichever government prevails, these funds available for distribution. If you have any questions or comments, please contact us.

 Best wishes,

 The KLS Stanford Team.

Stanford Update re Receiver’s Claims Process and SEC Suit

    KACHROO LEGAL SERVICES, P.C.

Stanford Update re Receiver’s Claims Process and SEC Suit 

Dear Stanford clients:

This update provides information regarding the claims process recently approved by the Court in Dallas, as well as the status of our class action pending against the SEC.

The Stanford Receiver’s Claims Process

On May 4, 2012, the Court in Dallas approved the Receiver’s proposal for a claims process and, on May 11, 2012, the Receiver published the Claim Form that needs to be completed. The deadline to submit your claim is September 1, 2012. For many of you, we have the necessary information and supporting documentation to complete the Claim Form on your behalf. However, if you have any of the following documents and have not previously sent us copies, please do so immediately:

• Personal checks, cashier’s checks, wire transfer advices, Stanford International Bank, Ltd. account statements and other documents showing that you invested funds or paied funds to Stanford;

• Your Stanford International Bank, Ltd. certificate of deposit, and any written contract or agreement made in connection with your investment in Stanford;

• A chronological accounting of all money you received from any Stanford entity;

• All documents and records reflecting any withdrawals ever made by you or payments received by you from Stanford;

• All agreements, promissory notes, purchase orders, invoices, itemized statements of running accounts, contracts, court judgments, mortgages or security agreements relating to your investment in Stanford; and

• Any other documents evidencing the amount and basis of your claim.

If you have not sent us any supporting documentation and you have no supporting documentation, please contact us immediately. We will need to explain to the Receiver why the documentation is unavailable.

Please note that a Claim Form must be completed even if you previously submitted or will be submitting a claim to the Antiguan liquidators. If you are in the Stanford Further Actions (SFA) program, but have decided to submit your own claim, please send it to us so we can check the claim and have a copy of it for our files.

Also note that the submission of a Proof of Claim to the Dallas receivership will submit you to the jurisdiction of the court for all purposes related to the claim. This means that, to the extent there is a dispute regarding your claim,

you may be required to appear in court or provide sworn testimony regarding your claim. You will also be required to sign your Proof of Claim under penalty of perjury. As soon as we complete your Proof of Claim, we will send you a copy to review, sign and send back to us.

If you have any questions regarding your claim, please contact us. If you want KLS to handle your claim, but you have not yet signed up for the SFA program, please contact us for further information on how to sign up.

Update on Stanford/SEC Case

On February 14, 2012, the United States filed a motion to dismiss our Complaint. As we explained in our last update, the United States is arguing that the government is immune from suit based on a statute that exempts it from liability for certain discretionary actions. In our response brief, we argued that we alleged certain statutory violations by the government and the government has no “discretion” to violate statutes. The motion is now fully briefed and we are waiting on a ruling from the judge. There is no timeline for when the judge will rule on the motion, and it may be several more weeks before we receive a ruling. We believe strongly that the Court should rule in our favor, but we are prepared to immediately appeal should the Court grant the motion to dismiss. We will update you as soon as the Court rules on the motion.

The KLS Stanford Team

Grant Thornton - Advisory of Objections

Stanford - Advisory of Objections

STANFORD UPDATE RE MOTION TO DISMISS

Dear KLS-Stanford Clients:

As you know, we filed the class action lawsuit against the United States government for its role in ignoring the Stanford Ponzi scheme and allowing the fraud to proceed unchecked for years. In response, the United States moved to dismiss the complaint on jurisdictional grounds. The United States is arguing that the government is immune from suit based on a statute that exempts it from liability for certain discretionary actions. The government claims that it has discretion over the methods by which it investigates and regulates the securities industry, and so it is immune from prosecution relating to its investigation and regulation of the Stanford entities. Indeed, the government has successfully used this argument to obtain the dismissal of a related Stanford case, as well as multiple similar cases against the government relating to the Madoff Ponzi scheme. However, our complaint does not allege liability on the basis of discretionary actions. Rather, our complaint alleges that the government failed to adhere to specific, mandatory requirements over which it had no discretion to ignore. This argument is fully explained and explored in our opposition to the motion to dismiss which we filed on Friday.
Attached is a copy of the government’s motion to dismiss and our opposition. The government will now have an opportunity to file a brief in reply to our opposition, and then the Court will rule on the motion. We are optimistic that the Court will rule in our favor, but are prepared to immediately appeal should the Court grant the motion to dismiss. We will provide another update as soon as the Court rules on the motion. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,
The KLS-Stanford Team

ZELAYA et al V.USA - KLS OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS.

Zelaya vs USA Opposition to MTD

STANFORD INTERNATIONAL BANK JOINT LIQUIDATORS INTRODUCE NEW ON LINE CLAIMS FORM

Based on creditors/victims feedback, the Joint Liquidators of Stanford
International Bank released a new interactive claims form today in efforts to make the process for filing a claim more user friendly and efficient. While this form does not change the information that is required to complete the proof of debt form, it does allow for the information to be entered in a more logical manner with the ability to add multiple accounts within the form. Upon entering the data a pdf version of the form is created that must then be printed and signed by all account holders before submitting. To access the forms, please go to:
http://www.sibliquidation.com/claims-administration/


We have started processing claims in the order in which they have been
received. Claims which require more information or which are clearly incorrect will take longer to process. We recognise that not all creditors/victims have full information to submit a claim based on the net cash method that is being used to calculate claims. If you require copies of any account statements, please send a request signed by all account holders to stanford.claims.support@uk.gt.com or by fax to +1 268 480 3725 and we will provide copies of the statements.

As an aside, we note that you may be able to receive immediate cash for your claim from one of a number of fund managers who have expressed interest in buying claims. We will post pertinent contact information on
www.sibliquidation.com for your consideration. The decision to sell your claim is yours alone. We cannot endorse any of the prospective buyers, nor advise you with respect to the value of your claim, nor advise as to the form, legal, tax or other ramifications of the sale or assignment of your claim.

For more information on the liquidation and the claims process we direct you to
www.sibliquidation.com.

Zelaya v. USA Motion to Dismiss

Zelaya v. USA Mot to Dismiss

Dr. Kachroo's Europe Visit Next Week

January 5, 2012

Dear Stanford Clients:
Dr. Kachroo will be traveling to Europe next week and she will be available to meet with investors at the following places and dates:

1. London- January 11th, 2012;
2. Vienna-January 12th thru 14th 2012;
3. Zurich-January 15th and 16th 2012; and
4. Paris-January 16th and 17th 2012.

Investors interested in meeting Dr. Kachroo at these locations should contact KLS in order to schedule meetings and formalize event dates.

Thank you.

KLS Stanford Team

KLS complaint against the U.S. Government/SEC

Please find below the KLS complaint against the U.S. Government/SEC for its negligence in the Stanford case causing billions of dollars of losses to investors. KLS continues to amend and file claims with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission so that you can all be covered by this complaint and the class that it represents. All those of you who may have filed with another attorney must amend your claims in order to be covered by this complaint.

KACHROO LEGAL SERVICES, P.C.

Dr. Gaytri D. Kachroo

219 Concord Avenue

Cambridge, MA 02142

Telephone: (617) 864-0755

Facsimile (617) 864-1125

gkachroo@kachroolegal.com

Press Release

Ft. Lauderdale, FLA – A class action lawsuit was filed against the United States yesterday, December 13, 2011, for the billions in losses suffered by investors in the Allen Stanford international Ponzi scheme.

The case, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida seeks to hold the SEC responsible for its failure to stop Stanford and his registered investment advisor and broker/dealer company Stanford Group Company (“SGC”), who the SEC investigated several times between 1997 and 2004. The suit claims that the SEC was grossly negligent in its actions following each investigation in failing to take any action to stop Stanford, whom SEC official had determined was operating a Ponzi scheme. The class action against the SEC was filed the day after the SEC filed suit against the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) for its refusal to reimburse investors for their losses.

“This case is unique because the SEC knew all along that this was a fraud and did nothing,” said lead attorney Dr. Gaytri Kachroo of Kachroo Legal Services, P.C. (KLS), who is representing investors in the class action. “If the SEC had simply refused to register SGC for any of its various securities laws violations or reported to SIPC that SBC was a Ponzi scheme and insolvent, the SEC could have stopped this scheme over a decade ago.”

In government investigations in 1997, 1998, 2002, and 2004, the SEC determined that Stanford was operating a Ponzi Scheme, but failed to take action to prevent his fraud. After increasing pressure from the Madoff collapse, the SEC finally acted in 2009, filing a case in federal court against Stanford and his companies, but only after investors had been defrauded of over $7 billion. The suit also alleges that the court-appointed SEC receiver has only been able to recover $100 million, net of expenses, out of the $7 billion investors lost because of the SEC’s negligence.

The case is Zelaya et al. v. United States of America, Case No. 11-CV-62644-RNS (S. D. Fla. 2011).