PPA Players' Funds Legal Guide

8/6/2019 PPA Players' Funds Legal Guide

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ppa-players-funds-legal-guide 1/23

LEGAL RIGHTS OF PLAYERS WITH UNPAID ACCOUNT BALANCES -A PPA INFORMATION GUIDE

The Poker Players Alliance (PPA) believes that one of the most pressing issues for American poker players at the present time is the return of player funds by the online poker sites who

ceased accepting US business in response to the cases filed against them or their alleged ownerson April 15, 2011.

To date, only one site, PokerStars, has made available the full return of all player funds it held on behalf of their U.S. players. The failure of FullTiltPoker (FTP) and UltimateBet/AbsolutePoker (UB/AP) to return funds has caused significant hardship to poker players and the PPA will doeverything and anything it can to help obtain prompt repayment to all affected players.

The PPA and its legal team have spent the past several weeks examining the legal options for thePPA to directly involve itself in the return of players’ funds. It is a complex matter to say the

least, and after careful review, there is not a viable legal option for the PPA to raise a legal claimat this juncture. We have determined that individuals whose funds are still withheld have themost valid legal claim to their money. The PPA is a grassroots organization representing the

players and does not have the necessary legal standing to initiate a successful legal action.Rightly, the PPA continues to focus its resources on legislative action to establish regulatedInternet poker where American consumers can play on U.S. licensed web sites and also be

provided full access to the U.S. legal system, something that is painfully absent today.

Nevertheless, the PPA believes that it has an obligation to empower the individual players withinformation on what they can do to help secure the return of their funds, since many of our members are wondering what legal options they may have. This document, prepared by legalexperts for the PPA, attempts to answer those concerns. (Again, this is provided only as aresource to our members and we urge anyone who is interested in pursuing any legal action toobtain their own legal counsel.)

1) THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT PLAYERS HAVE AN ENFORCEABLE LEGALRIGHT AGAINST ANY POKER SITE THAT FAILS TO RETURN THEIR ACCOUNT

BALANCES.

Generally speaking, gambling debts are not enforceable in a court of law. A player account balance, however, is not a gambling debt. When a player deposits money on a poker site, there isno "spin of the wheel" to determine whether that money remains the player’s or becomes the

property of the house. A player deposit on a poker site is a contractual relation between the player and the site under which the site agrees to hold the player's money to facilitate its use onthe site and to return the player’s money upon the player’s request (with some contractuallimitations at some sites). Under standard principles of law and equity there is little dispute that a

poker site which has accepted the money of a player has an obligation to return that money to the



player (unless specifically agreed otherwise: for example, some sites have had time limitsspecified as to how long a player had to wait after a deposit before asking for that money to bereturned).

Accordingly, when a poker site refuses to return a player's account balance, the poker site

is acting contrary to its contractual obligations and/or its equitable duty. This is clearly a basisfor a valid lawsuit.

But merely having a basis for a valid lawsuit does not mean filing a lawsuit is the bestcourse of action for each individual player. Even where it is clear that the lawsuit is likely toresult in a judgment in the player's favor, there are additional concerns which must beconsidered:

A) The cost of the lawsuit

Lawyers are expensive. Lawyers having to track down defendants in foreign jurisdictions are

even more expensive. There is always a cost-benefit analysis that needs to be done with respectto initiating a lawsuit.

Certain lawyers take cases on what is known as a contingency fee basis. In this situation, thelawyer is paid by retaining a percentage of what is collected from the lawsuit. This has the

benefit of saving the client from having to spend significant out-of-pocket money, but in the longrun generally results in the lawyer actually being paid more than if an hourly billing system wasused. Also, usually lawyers working on a contingency fee basis still expect the client to pay feesassociated with the lawsuit. And a lawsuit that crosses national borders almost always has highfees.

It is quite permissible for a lawyer to represent multiple plaintiffs if all are similarlysituated and there exists no conflict of interest between them. This method of retaining onelawyer for a large group of plaintiffs has the obvious benefit of reducing each plaintiff's overallcosts, especially if working with a lawyer on an hourly billing basis.

B) The likelihood of collecting on the judgment

It is possible to file a lawsuit against a site that refuses to pay in the U.S. courts. These sitesclearly have done enough business in the U.S. that a U.S. court would have jurisdiction over thesubject matter of the dispute between the player and the site. That the sites routinely state in their terms of service that disputes must be filed in their foreign courts is just as routinely ignored inmost U.S. courts.

But obtaining personal jurisdiction over the sites so that the lawsuit can proceed may be avery different situation. Depending on the state or Federal court in which the suit is filed, aspecific sort of process and notice to the defendant site will be required. Unless the site has someasset or other physical presence in the U.S., this could require the initiation of some sort of overseas process, which while not impossible, is more difficult and more expensive.



If jurisdiction is established, a judgment for the plaintiffs in a case like this is almostcertain. But a judgment is merely a piece of paper. Enforcing a judgment is another process.Unless the defendant site was willing to voluntarily pay (in which case one would assume thelawsuit was unnecessary to begin with), a plaintiff with a judgment will need to take further action in order to get paid. Such an action usually entails attempting to gain control of some asset

of the defendant site, either a building, a bank account, rights to software, or other tangible thingof value. The problem here is again that the sites in question seem to have no assets in the U.S.So once again having to take action in a foreign jurisdiction where site assets are located would

be required,

In light of all the above, certain lawyers may conclude that simply filing the lawsuit in theforeign jurisdiction to begin is the preferred way to proceed. This will again increase expense,however, and require lawyers who are licensed to practice in the foreign jurisdiction.

C) The possibility of the lawsuit creating collateral problems.

Lastly, a potential plaintiff needs to be fully aware of all possible consequences of participating in a lawsuit. While lawsuits may be filed in many cases with mere allegations,ultimately lawsuits require proof. Obtaining that proof is done through a process lawyers call"discovery." Discovery can involve answering many questions, usually under oath. In this regarda potential plaintiff needs to be sure that participating in the case will not lead to the disclosureof harmful information. Lawsuits are public documents and can be viewed by anyone.

Accordingly, winning players in some states may open themselves up to being sued for winning,as happened recently to a group of players in Illinois who published their winning ways online.Also, law enforcement authorities may be interested in information that clearly establishes a

person as one how has wagered on online poker - in at least one state such an action is clearlyillegal (WA) and in many other states the issue is very open. Of course no state has yet toactually prosecute a person for playing online poker, but the possibility cannot be ignored. Andfinally, tax authorities in various states may also take an interest in a lawsuit that claimssubstantial sums as winnings.

Obviously, whether any of these concerns apply to an individual will depend on theindividual, as will whether any of these potential negative consequences outweigh the interest inthe return of the money.

And finally on this subject, if the site is actually trying to repay players but merelyhaving difficulty doing so, filing a lawsuit against that site will only make the voluntary processless likely to complete itself as the site seeks to insure proper legal response rather than just mererepayment.

SUMMARY: Players, especially players owed substantial sums, should definitely speak with their own lawyer about whether it is in their interest to file a lawsuit eitherindividually or as a self-defined group of similarly situated players. They must balance thecosts and risks against the benefit of having an actual judgment to enforce in a foreigncourt or a foreign bankruptcy proceeding.



2) THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION AS TO WHETHER ALL OR SOME PLAYERS

HAVE ANY RIGHT TO SEEK REPAYMENT FROM THE FUNDS HELD IN THEACCOUNTS SEIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

It has been well reported and documented that contemporaneous with the filing of theApril 15, 2011, indictments against the site owners and their payment processors, the FederalGovernment initiated substantial forfeiture actions against site assets and specifically moved tofreeze bank accounts used by the sites to hold substantial funds. Subsequently the FederalGovernment has taken legal proceedings to declare these funds forfeited to the FederalGovernment as the "proceeds" of illegal activity. Many players believe that a substantial reasonthey have not been paid as of yet is that these seized funds represent a significant amount of the sites’ assets, though exact figures are not yet public knowledge. So, players ask, how aboutseeking to get player money from the money seized by the Government? Answering thisquestion is enormously complex, and whether and how to seek to do it (or not) will once againdepend on the specific circumstances of the individual player. For players to determine that

answer for themselves, the basic principles of Federal Forfeiture must be understood anddiscussed with private counsel.

A) The basics of Federal Forfeiture proceedings

Federal Forfeiture is a highly specialized legal process that operates under its own set of rules. The basic principle is that property used in or obtained from illegal activity becomes"illegal proceeds" and should be made the property of the government as a means of further deterring illegal activity.

Property used in or obtained from activities which violate any of the various Federalantigambling laws are declared illegal proceeds subject to forfeiture by 18 U.S.C. § 981 of theU.S. Code.

Property used in or obtained from activities which violate bank fraud and wire fraud lawsare also declared illegal proceeds subject to forfeiture by 18 U.S.C. § 981 of the U.S. Code.The definition of "proceeds" is found at Title 18, section 981 and reads:

“(A) In cases involving illegal goods, illegal services, unlawful activities, and telemarketing and health care fraud schemes, the term “proceeds” means property of any kind obtained directlyor indirectly, as the result of the commission of the offense giving rise to forfeiture , and any

property traceable thereto, and is not limited to the net gain or profit realized from the offense.

(B) In cases involving lawful goods or lawful services that are sold or provided in an illegal manner, the term “proceeds” means the amount of money acquired through the illegal transactions resulting in the forfeiture, less the direct costs incurred in providing the goods or

services. The claimant shall have the burden of proof with respect to the issue of direct costs.The direct costs shall not include any part of the overhead expenses of the entity providing the

goods or services, or any part of the income taxes paid by the entity."



Under this statute, if offering online poker was illegal, then pretty much every pennycollected by and in the possession of the sites is "proceeds" and forfeitable. If offering online

poker was legal, then the "proceeds" are only the profits made from the alleged bank fraud andany other alleged illegal money transfers.

Federal Forfeiture comes in two varieties, criminal and civil. With respect to the April 15th casesand the assets seized, the government has filed both a criminal forfeiture case and a civilforfeiture case.

With respect to criminal forfeiture proceedings, the rules do not allow the filing of a claim by third parties until the criminal case has ended with a finding of guilty and the court has issuedan order of forfeiture with respect to the assets. At that time, and only at that time, may third

parties claim and present an interest in the property to be considered by the court. These rulesare found at Title 18, Section 982.

With respect to civil forfeiture proceedings, third parties are allowed to file claims against

the property in question at the beginning of the process and their claims must be addressed before any other order is made regarding the property. There are significant and specificlimitations on this process however.

Third party claims filed in civil forfeiture proceedings must be filed within 60 days of theGovernment’s first publication of notice of its intent to seek forfeiture. With respect to the April15 th cases, the government's notice was first published on May 16, 2011, and so the deadline tofile claims is July 15, 2011 . A copy of the published notice is attached to this document asAppendix A.

B) The important details regarding filing a claim in a pending civil forfeiture case

1. The basic procedure.

The basic procedure for filing a claim in a civil forfeiture case is, thankfully, relatively straightforward. The specific requirements are spelled out in Rule G of the Federal Rules of CivilProcedure, section 5 of which states:

“(a) Filing a Claim.(i) A person who asserts an interest in the defendant property may contest the forfeiture by filing a claim in the court where the action is pending. The claim must:(A) identify the specific property claimed;(B) identify the claimant and state the claimant’s interest in the property;(C) be signed by the claimant under penalty of perjury; and (D) be served on the government attorney designated under Rule G(4)(a)(ii)(C) or (b)(ii)(D )”

A sample claim form is attached to this document as Appendix B. The details for (A) and(D) with respect to the April 15 th cases can be found in the notice that is Appendix A.

Clearly, filing a claim is simple and designed to be capable of being done without an



attorney. But the process does not stop with the mere filing of a claim and so proceeding withoutan attorney is not advisable for the following two reasons: 1) Rule G,5 (b) requires that "Aclaimant must serve and file an answer to the complaint or a motion under Rule 12 within 21days after filing the claim. A claimant waives an objection to in rem jurisdiction or to venue if the objection is not made by motion or stated in the answer" and 2) Title 18, United States Code,

Section 983(h)(1), permits a court to impose a civil fine on anyone asserting an interest in property which the court determines was frivolous.

ANYONE CONSIDERING FILING A CLAIM SHOULD DEFINITELY CONSULT AN ATTORNEY 1) TO ADVISE THEM AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEIR SPECIFIC CLAIM IS FRIVOLOUS AND, 2) PRIOR TO ATTEMPTING TO FILE THE FORMAL PLEADING CALLED THE ANSWER .

2. Specific concerns regarding player claims in the April 15 th civil cases

a) When is claim frivolous?

A claim can be considered frivolous when there exists no legal basis for the claim even if everything the claimant says is true. The legal basis for a third party claim is set out in Title 18,Section 983 of the U.S, code. Essentially, a player can either claim to be an owner of the

property and that the property is not subject to forfeiture, or a player can claim to be an “innocentowner” of the property who should not be harmed by the government forfeiting the property.

The first step in either of these claims is establishing some form of ownership of the property. This is a significant hurdle with respect to the seized accounts. It is clear that no player had any control over any of the accounts that would normally be present with"ownership" (you could not go to the bank and ask to have "your" funds withdrawn from theaccount, for example). The fact that cash is fungible is also recognized in the Federal Statutes.Title 18 section 984 has specific provisions applicable to the seizure and forfeiture of cash. Hereis the main one about funds in bank accounts:

"(1) In any forfeiture action in rem in which the subject property is cash, monetary instrumentsin bearer form, funds deposited in an account in a financial institution (as defined in section 20of this title), or precious metals— (A) it shall not be necessary for the Government to identify the specific property involved inthe offense that is the basis for the forfeiture; and (B) it shall not be a defense that the property involved in such an offense has been removed and replaced by identical property. "

The bottom line here is that a player is not an "owner" of funds held in an account owned by a poker site simply because the site is legally obligated to return the player's account balance.

- It is important to note here that some players appear to have a unique situationwith respect to cases other than the April 15 th cases. Specifically, some e-wallets arereporting to their customers that money sent directly to them was seized by the U.S.government in transit. A seizure of a wire in transit directed to a specific player is a vastly



different situation, there is little doubt as to who is the "owner" of the funds beingtransferred in that situation. A check drawn on a seized account is another clear indicationof an ownership interest.

There is a legal way around the general problem of ownership, and that is the doctrine of

"Constructive Trust."Basically, a person who uses fraud to obtain the transfer of ownership of property fromanother can be deemed a "constructive trustee" rather than an owner of the property. Fraudoccurs when the person accepting property promises to use the property for certain

purposes and in certain ways that are beneficial to the person giving the property but then failsto live up to the terms of the promise.

In New York law (since the April 15 th cases are in New York), a constructive trust is anequitable remedy imposed to prevent unjust enrichment. ( Sharp v Kosmalski , 40 NY2d 119[1976]). The following elements must be established to state a claim for this type of relief: (1) a

confidential or fiduciary relation; (2) a promise; (3) a transfer in reliance thereon; and (4) unjustenrichment (Id. at 121).

So, if a "constructive trust" can be established, the law then declares that the propertywhich looks like it is owned by one person is declared to actually be owned by another. In thissituation, if the sites are declared constructive trustees, then the money in the seized accounts isnot owned by them, but is owned by the folks who gave the sites the property: the players. TheConstructive Trust has been successfully used in certain contexts. United States v. $4,224,958.57(Boylan), 392 F.3d 1002 (9th Cir. 2004); United States v. Shefton, 548 F.3d 1360 (11th Cir.2008).

Whether a "constructive trust" can be established on the facts surrounding the April 15 th casesis a difficult question. There clearly was a transfer made in reliance on a promise (you sent thesite money based on the promise that the money would be returned at your request - after adjusting for wins and losses of course). But there was nothing confidential about therelationship, it was a normal business activity. Was the relationship fiduciary? That seeminglydepends on the specifics of the promise that sites made to the players. A site that specifically

promised to keep your account balance funds in a segregated trust account would likely fit thedefinition of fiduciary -- but only if the site that made that specific promise.

It is also true, however, that many players, especially players at high volume or athigh stakes, and some who used affiliates to sign up, had other communications with these sites.These other communications may contain promises that do rise to the level of creating afiduciary relationship. As such, there may be many players out there with sufficient personal

promises received from a site that may be sufficient to establish the required fiduciaryrelationship. But obviously that will vary from specific player to specific player.

Assuming an ownership interest can be alleged in the claim, there are still problems andissues. The most common form of a claim in a civil forfeiture case is that of an "innocentowner." Generally an "innocent owner" is a person who had no idea that the property in question



was being used for illegal purposes, such as when you loan your car to someone not knowingthat the someone intends to use the car to facilitate a drug deal. But there are some specific

provisions in the law that limit the applicability of the "innocent owner" doctrine to poker players. These limitations are found in Title 18, Section 983. First, subsection (1) provides that:

"With respect to a property interest in existence at the time the illegal conduct giving rise to forfeiture took place, the term “innocent owner” means an owner who— ( i) did not know of the conduct giving rise to forfeiture ; or (ii) upon learning of the conduct giving rise to the forfeiture, did all that reasonably could beexpected under the circumstances to terminate such use of the property"

It would be impossible for a player to say that he or she did not know that the "property”in question (their transferred funds) would be used to play online poker. A claim that the player was unaware that conducting an online poker operation in the U.S. was illegal would have theobvious difficulty of overcoming the doctrine that "ignorance of the law is not an excuse."

Furthermore, subsection 2 of the statute clearly codifies the need to state more in a claimas an "innocent owner" than simply that the site owes you money:

"In this subsection, the term “owner”— (A) means a person with an ownership interest in the specific property sought to be forfeited,including a leasehold, lien, mortgage, recorded security interest, or valid assignment of anownership interest; and (B) does not include — (i) a person with only a general unsecured interest in, or claim against, the property or estate of another;(ii) a bailee unless the bailor is identified and the bailee shows a colorable legitimate interest inthe property seized; or (iii) a nominee who exercises no dominion or control over the property"

Lastly, a player who could otherwise establish an ownership interest in the propertymight choose to assert that the property is not subject to forfeiture because conducting an online

poker operation in the U.S. is not illegal, and therefore the money is not subject to forfeiture.As a practical matter, however, this would essentially require arguing the sites’ case for them. If the sites are successful in arguing such a case then the money would ultimately bereturned to the sites. One would presume that in such a case the sites would then use that moneyto pay any money still owed to players. A player who does not trust the sites to do this in theevent of a ruling that conducting an online poker operation involving U.S. players is not aviolation of Federal Gambling laws might still wish to consider adopting this approach,especially if that player were owed very substantial amounts, but the cost of mounting this kindof claim would be extremely high.

3. Other concerns regarding filing a direct claim against the seized money

One of the provisions of Rule G regarding forfeiture procedure allows the Government toserve a limited set of questions that must be answered under oath very shortly after the claim is



filed:

(6) Special Interrogatories.(a) Time and Scope.The government may serve special interrogatories limited to the claimant’s identity and

relationship to the defendant property without the court’s leave at any time after the claim is filed and before discovery is closed.

Certainly such interrogatories will ask for your specific account information and for anadmission that you directly played online poker. There is no limitation on what the Governmentcan or could do with these admissions once they are provided. Similar to the discussionregarding filing a suit against the sites, certain players with tax issues, state law issues or other

personal issues regarding their play may not want to subject themselves to having to providethese admissions. Again, the choice has to be made by the individual player after considering alloptions and all personal circumstances and should be made with the benefit of an attorney'sadvice.

Another part of Title 18, section 981 contains a provision that will most likely precludethe resolution of civil forfeiture while the criminal case is pending:

"(g)(1) Upon the motion of the United States, the court shall stay the civil forfeiture proceeding if the court determines that civil discovery will adversely affect the ability of the Government toconduct a related criminal investigation or the prosecution of a related criminal case."

The government files this motion in virtually every case where there are civil and criminal proceedings pending at the same time and it is almost always granted by the Court. So even if after considering all the above a player can construct a valid claim, can withstand personalscrutiny and decides to pay the costs to move forward with the claim - that player will stillhave to wait a significant time before seeing his claim resolved. There is an exception that allowsfor a civil claim to move forward in advance of the criminal case if it appears that the criminalcase will never move forward or will be delayed extensively, but even that exception would notcome into play until a very lengthy time had passed.

SUMMARY: the vast majority of players would have a very difficult time demonstrating avalid claim to the funds in the seized accounts; and an equally (if not more) difficult timeprevailing on that claim (which certainly would not happen any time soon). Some players,however, will have unique circumstances that might make the filing of a claim a positivemove. Any player who believes, after reading the above, that they wish to proceed with aclaim should consult an attorney as soon as possible.

3) The possibility of an alternate remedy under Federal forfeiture law.

Federal forfeiture law specifically allows for the Attorney General to engage in a processcalled "remission." Remission is, in its broadest sense, a discretionary relief intended to reducethe hardship that may arise from forfeiture for persons who have incurred a monetary loss fromthe forfeiture.. Statutory authority for remission in civil forfeiture cases is found at Title 18,



section 981(d) (which references Title 19, section 1618 where the appropriate agent - here theAttorney general - " finds the existence of such mitigating circumstances as to justify theremission or mitigation of such fine, penalty, or forfeiture, may remit or mitigate the same upon

such terms and conditions as he deems reasonable and just ." Statutory authority for remission incriminal cases is found in 21 U.S.C. § 853(i)(1), incorporated by reference in 18 U.S.C. § 982 for

money laundering and other offenses where the applicable text allows the Attorney General to"take any other action to protect the rights of innocent persons which is in the interests of justiceand which is not inconsistent with the provisions of [the applicable chapter or section].”

The actual practice of remission is governed by regulation. The regulations are found atTitle 28, Code of Federal Regulations, part 9 (28 C.F.R. Part 9). The regulations continue to

provide that "general creditor[s] may not be granted remission or mitigation of forfeiture unlesshe or she otherwise qualifies as petitioner under this part." 28 C.F.R. Part 9.6(a). To otherwisequalify as a petitioner a person must either be an owner (subject to the problems we have

previously discussed), a lien holder (not applicable to poker players) or a " victim " or a " bailor ."

A bailor is one who gives possession or control of property to another withoutrelinquishing their ownership rights. A bailor’s ability to file for remission is premised on 9.6(c):" Voluntary bailments. A petitioner who allows another to use his or her property without cost, and who is not in the business of lending money secured by property or of leasing or renting property for profit, shall be granted remission or mitigation of forfeiture in accordancewith the provisions of 9.5." Part 9.5 governs the specific procedure for seeking remission. Part9.5 adds the further requirement that the petitioner meet one of three additional criteria, namelythat "[t]he petitioner is innocent within the meaning of the innocent owner provisions of theapplicable civil forfeiture statute, is a bona fide purchaser for value without cause to believe thatthe property was subject to forfeiture at the time of the purchase, or is one who held a legallycognizable interest in the seized property at the time of the violation underlying the forfeituresuperior to that of the defendant within the meaning of the applicable criminal forfeiture statute,and is thereby entitled to recover his or her interest in the forfeited property by statute."

A "victim" has a special right to seek remission under the previously cited statutes. "Victim" isdefined as "a person who has incurred a pecuniary loss as a direct result of the commission of theoffense underlying a forfeiture.” Part 9.2(v).

In addition, a victim must show that "(1) a pecuniary loss of a specific amount has beendirectly caused by the criminal offense, or related offense, that was the underlying basis for theforfeiture, and the loss is supported by documentary evidence including invoices and receipts; (2)the pecuniary loss is the direct result of the illegal acts and is not the result of otherwise lawfulacts that were committed in the course of the criminal offense; (3) the victim did not knowinglycontribute to, participate in, benefit from, or act in a willfully blind manner towards thecommission of the offense, or related offense, that was the underlying basis for the forfeiture; (4)the victim has not in fact been compensated for the wrongful loss of the property by the

perpetrator or others; and (5) the victim does not have recourse reasonably available to other assets from which to obtain compensation for the wrongful loss of the property." 28 C.F.R. §9.8(a).



Part 3 of this requirement is problematic except that the position may be taken that sincethe actual playing of online poker violated no Federal Statute and is clearly not a criminalactivity under Federal law, a player did not contribute or benefit from the illegal activity whichwas the alleged unlawful operation of the online poker sites.

It is very helpful that a petition for remission can be submitted as a group represented bya single individual representative. This requires a very formal process under the regulations andrequires every individual who will be compensated to participate at a certain level. Rule 9.9(h).Though difficult in the context of millions of poker players, the process does not appear impossible, just unwieldy.

Finally, there is a time limit on petitions for remission (30 days after notice) but this provision seems to refer only to actual notice, not published notice, and the same provisionstates that "Petitions shall be considered any time after notice until such time as the forfeited

property is placed in official use, sold, or otherwise disposed of according to law."

The area of remission remains a possible area of relief, despite the difficulties notedabove, primarily because in the end the ability to grant or deny remission to persons rests solelywith the office of the U.S. Attorney General and is not reviewable by a court of law. Thestatutory authority regarding remission is clearly greater than that provided by the regulations. Insuch circumstances it is always easier to ask for special treatment from an executive official withdiscretion to take into account unusual circumstances than it is to convince a court that the set of unusual circumstances warrants an exception to a statute.

Additionally, Federal Regulations, especially internal Executive Branch regulations suchas 28 C.F.R. 9, are far more easily amended than statutes if it turns out that amendments need to

be made to allow for the seized money to be returned to players as part of a remission process.



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK COURT CASE NUMBER: 11 CIV. 2564 LBS; NOTICE OF FORFEITURE ACTION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 981, the United States filed a verified Complaint for Forfeitureagainst the following property:

$231,000.00 formerly on deposit at First Republic Bank in Account numbered80000373283, held in the name of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto(09-FBI-004840)

$124,178.72 formerly on deposit at Service 1st Bank of Nevada in Account numbered2020003792 held in the name of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto(09-FBI-004855)

$30.27 formerly on deposit at Huntington National Bank in Account numbered01662184444. held in the name of SNR, Inc. and all property traceable thereto(10-FBI-000118)

$1,057,797.29 formerly on deposit at Huntington National Bank in account numbered01662184457 held in the name of SNR, Inc. and all property traceable thereto(10-FBI-000119)

$649,261.20 formerly on deposit at Huntington National Bank in Account numbered01662191343 held in the name of SNR, Inc. and all property traceable thereto(10-FBI-000121)

$199,175.14 formerly on deposit at Bank of West in account numbered 658049382 heldin the name of SNR, Inc. and all property traceable thereto; (10-FBI-000174)

$4,925.00 formerly on deposit at Bank of America in account numbered 0952071585held in the name of SNR, Inc. and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-000248)

$25.00 formerly on deposit at Bank of America account numbered 0952071603, held inthe name of SNR, Inc. and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-000249)

$992,499.53 formerly on deposit at Citibank in Account numbered 203366638 held inthe name of SNR, Inc. and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-000250)

$2,057,620.28 formerly on deposit at Wells Fargo Bank in Account numbered5383346862 held in the name of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto(10-FBI-000251)

$410,449.93 formerly on deposit at Bank of America Account numbered 229006067857held in the name of Viable Marketing Corp. and all property traceable thereto



(10-FBI-000262)

$33,743.75 formerly on deposit at Bank of America Account numbered 003678667131held in the name of EZO, LLC and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-000263)

$8,168,168.89 formerly on deposit at Fifth Third Bank in Account numbered7431859508, held in the name of Viable Marketing Corp. and all property traceablethereto (10-FBI-000349)

$40,960.86 formerly on deposit at Fifth Third Bank in Account numbered 7432618069,held in the name of Viable Marketing Corp. and all property traceable thereto(10-FBI-000350)

$865,000.00 formerly on deposit at Bank of America in account numbered 0952071467,held in the name of SNR, Inc. and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-000407)

$1,035,415.44 formerly on deposit at Nevada Commerce Bank in account numbered0021002712 held in the name of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto(10-FBI-002096)

$122,308.78 formerly on deposit at Nevada Commerce Bank in account numbered0021002795 held in the name of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto(10-FBI-002215)

$3,055,108.21 formerly on deposit at Citibank in account numbered 203023239 held inthe name of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-002453)

$784,160.95 formerly on deposit at Citibank in account numbered 203118542 held in thename of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-002454)

$1,000.00 formerly on deposit at Citibank in account numbered 203118559 held in thename of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-002455)

$925.00 formerly on deposit at Citibank in account numbered 203118575 held in thename of G.I. Holdings and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-002456)

$447,196.79 from account numbered 804815470 in the name of ASP Consultants, LLCat JPMorgan and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-005035)

$12,642.44 from account numbered 804815488 in the name of ASP Consultants, LLC atJPMorgan and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-005036)

$4,472.58 from account numbered 822823779 in the name of ASP Consultants, LLC atJPMorgan and all property traceable thereto(10-FBI-005037)

$84.21 from account numbered 822824025 in the name of ASP Consultants, LLC at



JPMorgan and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-005038)

$6,047.84 from account numbered 822824140 in the name of ASP Consultants, LLC atJPMorgan and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-005039)

$17,460.95 from account numbered 1003245502 in the name of ASP Consultants, LLCat JPMorgan and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-005040)

$8,018.04 from Bank Account numbered 9105709543 in the name of AutoscribeCorporation at Citibank, N.A. and all property traceable thereto (10-FBI-005324)

$3,029,711.94 formerly on deposit at City National Bank in Account Number 3701177950, held in the name of G.I. and all property traceable thereto (11-FBI-001655)

account numbered 27351910081015 held at Credit Agricole (Suisse) SA, Switzerland, inthe name of Sphene International Limited, IBAN CH8908741014319300001, and all

funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002706)account held at Credit Agricole (Suisse) SA, Switzerland, in the name of Sphene(International) Limited, IBAN CH6208741014319300002, and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002707)

all accounts held at Bank Hapoalim (Suisse) SA, Luxembourg, in the name of SpheneInternational, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002708)

account held at Credit Agricole (Suisse) SA, Switzerland, in the name of the OldfordGroup Limited, IBAN CH1508741014093800001, and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002709)

Account numbered 1892947126 held at Comerica Bank, Dallas, Texas, in the name of Tiltware, and all funds traceacle thereto (11-FBI-002710)

Account number 1892947134 held at Comerica Bank, Dallas, Texas, in the nameTiltware, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002711)

Account numbered E34512308000000007283 held at Wirecard Bank AG, Germany, inthe name of Kolyma Corporation, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002712)

Account numbered E79512308000000007249 held at Wirecard Bank AG, Germany, inthe name of Kolyma Corporation, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002713)

Account held at Basler Kantonal Bank, Switzerland, in the name of Ranston Ltd. IBANCH4900770016542263375, and all funds traceble thereto (11-FBI-002714)

Account held at the Basler Kantonal Bank, Switzerland, in the name of Ranston LTD,IBAN CH7000770016542254461, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002715)



Account held at Basler Kantonal Bank, Switzerland, in the name of Mailmedia,numbered CH7300770252534932001, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002716)

Account held at Banque Invik SA, Luxembourg, in the name of Vanatge Limited, IBAN

LU811944013080000USD, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002717)Account held at Basler Kantonal Bank, Switzerland, in the name of Vantage Ltd. and allfunds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002718)

Account held at Allied Irish Bank in the name of Filco Ltd. IBANIE85AIBK93006727971082, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002719)

Account held at WestLB AG, Germany, in the name of Filco Ltd, IBANDE19512308000000007262 and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002720)

Account numbered MT23SBMT5550500000001108 held at Sparkasse Bank Malta in thename of Blue Water Services Ltd, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002721)

Account numbered MT14SBMT55505000000011451GAEURO held at Sparkasse Bank Malta in the name Tokwiro Enterprises ENRG, and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002764)

Account numbered 61-12-9436-6 held at Banco Pananemo De La Vivienda SA,Panama, in the name of Disora Investment, Inc. and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002765)

Account numbered 0011271083 held at citibank London, England in the name of Mundial Valores, for the benefit of Disora Investments, Inc., MAM000804 and all fundstraceable thereto (11-FBI-002766)

Account numbered CH4308755011432400000 held at Pictet and Co., Switzerland, inthe name of Rintrade Finance SA and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002767)

Account numbered 99045014801116 held at Bank of Scotland Ireland, Inc., Ireland, inthe name of Pocket Kings Consulting LTD, and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002777)

account numbered 99022000439546 held at National Irish Bank, Ireland, in the name of Pocket Kings Ltd, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002778)

Account numbered 99022000440162 held at National Irish Bank, Ireland, in the name of Pocket Kings Ltd, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002779)

Account numbered IE8IPBS9906291390203 held at Irish Permanent Treasury, PLC inthe name of Pocket Kings and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002780)



Account numbered IE07DABA95151340074209 held at National Irish Bank in the nameof Pocket Kings limited and all funds traceable thereto Acct#IE07DABA95151340074209 (11-FBI-002783)

Account numbered IE38DABA95151340025151 held at National Irish Bank in the nameof Pocket Kings Limited and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002784)

Account numbered IE42DABA95151340062618 held at National Irish Bank in the namePocket Kings Limited and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002785)

Account numbered IE58IPBS99062913190203 held at Irish Permanent Treasury in thename of Pocket Kings Limited and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002786)

Account numbered IE67AIBK93208626257031 held at Allied Irish Bank in the name of Pocket Kings and all funds treaceable thereto (11-FBI-002787)

Account numbered LU621944013130000USD held at Banque Invik, Luxemburg, held inthe name of Pocket Kings Limited, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002811)

Account numbered IE07DABA95151340074209 held at Danske Bank A/S, Denmark,held in the name Pocket Kings Ltd. and all funds traceable thereto Acct#IE07DABA95151340074209 (11-FBI-002812)

account numbered 121015408 held at Sunfirst Bank, St. George, Utah, in the name of Triple Seven LP d/b/a Netwebfunds.com, and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002814)

Account numbered 121015390 held at Sunfirst Bank, St. George, Utah, in the name of Triple Seven d/b/a A Web Debit, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002815)

Account numbered 27351910081015 held at Societe Generale Cyprus LTD, Ctprys, inthe name of Golden Shores Properties Limited and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002816)

Account numbered CY1211501001065983USDCACC002 held at FBME Bank LTD,Cyprus, in the name of Triple Seven Inc., and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002817)

Account numbered 5510045221 held at Wells Fargo, N.A.. in the name of KombiCapital, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002818)

Account numbered 7478010312 held at Wells Fargo, N.A. in the name of Kombi Capitaland all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002819)

Account numbered 12900584 held at Sunfirst Bank, St. George, Utah, formerly in the



name of Sunfirst Bank ITF Powder Money/Full Tilt, now in the name of Sunfirst Bank and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002820)

Account numbered 129000576 on deposit at Sunfirst Bank, St. George, Utah. Formerlyin the name of Sunfirst bank ITF Mastery Merchant/Psaars, now in the name of Sunfirst

bank, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002821)Account numbered 200003291 held at All American Bank, Des Plaines, Illinois, in thename of 21 Debit LLC, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002822)

Account numbered 200003317 held at All American Bank, Des Plaines, Illinois, in thename of 21 Debit LLC, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002823)

Account numbered 200003325 held at All American Bank, Des Plaines, Illinois, in thename of 21 Debit LLC and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002824)

Account number 200003309 held at All American Bank, Des Plaines, Illinois, in thename of 21 Debit LLC, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002825)

Account number 201002907 at Barclays Bank, UK in the name of Hotwire FinancialLLC, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002826)

Account number GB26BARC20473563472044 at Barclays Bank, UK, in the name of Hotwire Financial LTD, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002827)

Account number 953500105 at Bank One Utah, in the name of A4 A Consulting, and allfunds traceable therto (11-FBI-002828)

Account number 730666271, at Whitney National Bank, New Orleans, Louisiana in thename of Ndeka LLC, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002829)

Account number 2919208124 at Bank of America, N.A. in the name of Credit CapitalFunding, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002830)

Account numbered 32433 at New City Bank in the name of 21Debit LLC dba PSPayments, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002831)

Account numbered 32441 at New City Bank in the name of 21Debit LLC dba FLTPayments (11-FBI-002832)

Account number 32506 at New City Bank in the name of 21Debit LLC, and all fundstraceable thereto (11-FBI-002833)

Account numbered 972402309 held at UMPQUA Bank, Roseburg, Oregon, in the nameof "ULTRA SAFE PAY", and all property traceable thereto (11-FBI-002834)



Account numbered 004-411-346034-838 held at Hong Kong and Shanghai BankingCorporation, Hong Kong, in the name of Griting Investments LTD, and all fundstraceable thereto (11-FBI-002854)

Account numbered 1093 held at Vensure Federal Credit Union, Mesa, Arizon, in the

name of Trinity Global Commerce Corp (11-FBI-002855)Account numbered 1200402039 held at Banca Privada D'Andorra, Andorra, in the nameof Trinity Global Commerce Corp., and all funds traceable (11-FBI-002856)

Account numbered MT54SBMT55505000000016782GAUSD0 held at Sparkasse Bank Malta PLC, Malta, in the name of Trinity Global Commerce Corp., and all fundstraceable thereto (11-FBI-002857)

Account numbered 27554003786 held at Royal Bank of Canada, Canada, in the nameof Terricorp Inc. d/b/a TLC Global, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002858)


Account numbered 2775401038 held at Royal Bank of Canada, Canada, in the name of Terricorp Inc. d/b/a TLC Global, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002860)


Account numbered 4800198399 held at Harris Bank, Palatine, Illinois, and all fundstraceable thereto (11-FBI-002862)

Account numbered GB81RBOS16630000368036 held at the Royal Bank of Scotland inthe name of Voltrex Ltd., and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002863)

Account numbered 2000059819596 held at Wachovia Bank, a division of Wells FargoBank, N.A., in the name "Eastern Expressions," and all funds traceable thereto(11-FBI-002864)

Account numbered 104773862842 held at the Bendix Foreign Exchange, Toronto,Ontario, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-002865)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity known as PokerStars (11-FBI-003343)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity known as Full Tilt Poker (11-FBI-003344)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity known as Absolute Poker (11-FBI-003345)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity known as Ultimate Bet (11-FBI-003346)



All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity known as Oldford Group Ltd.(11-FBI-003347)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity known as Rational Entertainment

Enterprises Ltd. (11-FBI-003348)All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity known as Pyr Software Ltd.(11-FBI-003349)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity known as Stelekram Ltd. (11-FBI-003350)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Sphene International Ltd. (11-FBI-003351)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Tiltware LLC. (11-FBI-003352)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Kolyma Corporation A.V.V.(11-FBI-003353)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Pocket Kings Ltd. (11-FBI-003354)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Pocket Kings Consulting Ltd.(11-FBI-003355)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Filco Ltd. (11-FBI-003356)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Vantage Ltd. (11-FBI-003357)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Ranston Ltd. (11-FBI-003358)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Mail Media Ltd. (11-FBI-003359)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Full Tilt Poker Ltd. (11-FBI-003360)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity SGS Systems Inc. (11-FBI-003361)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Trust Services Ltd. (11-FBI-003362)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Fiducia Exchange Ltd. (11-FBI-003363)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Blue Water Services Ltd. (11-FBI-003364)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Absolute Entertainment, S.A.(11-FBI-003365)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Entity Blanca Games, Inc of Antigua



(11-FBI-003366)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Internet Domain Pokerstars.com (11-FBI-003367)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Internet Domain Fulltiltpoker.com

(11-FBI-003368)All right, title and interest in Defendant Internet Domain Absolutepoker.com(11-FBI-003369)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Internet Domain Ultimatebet.com(11-FBI-003370)

All right, title and interest in Defendant Internet Domain Ub.com (11-FBI-003371)

Account held at National Bank of California, in the name of Viable Processing Solutions,

acct number 2547716, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-003393)Account held at National Bank of California, in the name of Viable Processing Solutions,acct number 2778815, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-003394)

Account held at Four Oaks Bank and Trust, in the name of LST Financial, acct number 520055501, and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-003395)




Account held at Hawaii National Bank, in the name of MAS Inc., acct number 12008656,and all funds traceable thereto (11-FBI-003399)

All funds formerly on deposit at Four Oaks Bank and Trust Company, in accountnumbered 520065201, held in the name of LST Financial, and all property traceablethereto (11-FBI-003568)

Any person claiming a legal interest in the Defendant Property must file a verified Claim withthe court within 60 days from the first day of publication (May 16, 2011) of this Notice on thisofficial government internet web site and an Answer to the complaint or motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure within 21 days thereafter. 18 U.S.C. § 983(h)(1) permits a



court to impose a civil fine on anyone asserting an interest in property which the courtdetermines was frivolous.

The verified Claim and Answer must be filed with the Clerk of the Court, United States DistrictCourt, 500 Pearl Street, Room 120, New York, NY 10007, and copies of each served upon

Assistant United States Attorney Michael Lockard, One St. Andrew's Plaza, New York, NY10007, or default and forfeiture will be ordered. See, 18 U.S.C. § 983(a)(4)(A) and Rule G(5) of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions.



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

___________________________________ xUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :

Plaintiff ::

- v. - : 11 Civ. 2564 (LBS):

POKERSTARS et al., :Defendants :

:ALL RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN :THE ASSETS OF ...., et al. :

Defendants-in-rem ::

___________________________________ x

NOTICE OF CLAIM

Part 1I, _____________________________, of

____________________________________

____________________________________

____________________________________

do hereby give notice that I have a claim to the return of the following property among the subject matter of the above captioned action:

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

My interest in the property is ____________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

Part 2

I attest and declare under penalty of perjury that my claim to this property is not frivolous and that theinformation provided in support of my claim is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Ifurther attest that I have this same day forwarded a copy of this Notice of Claim to Assistant United



States Attorney Michael Lockard, One St. Andrew's Plaza, New York, NY 10007

______________________________________ _____________ Name of Claimant (Print) Date

______________________________________ Signature of Claimant

PPA Players' Funds Legal Guide

Documents

Transcript of PPA Players' Funds Legal Guide