All Documents for State and Federal Court, press releases, Re/Max fraud, FBI, and kickbacks moved to document index.

Open letter #2 from Joseph Miner
President, All Cities Realty, Inc.

To all current and former CF Real Estate Loans, Inc. [DBA Re/Max All Cities Realty] agents and brokers:

The name of our company is ALL CITIES REALTY, Inc. We do business using the trademark ALL CITIES REALTY. We are suing Re/Max because they will not cease using the name ALL CITIES REALTY. A recent newspaper article in the Daily News makes many mis-statements and inaccurately reports on this current legal action.

Dear agents and interested persons,

Don't let CF's rhetoric persuade you. The phrase ALL CITIES REALTY is not generic nor merely descriptive. If the mark did not meet the guidelines for inclusion in the Federal Trademark Register then a Federal Attorney would not have allowed registration. It's just that simple. We also have many other forms of legal protection for the name.

This legal action has nothing to do with any business named ALL CITIES, ALL REALTY, or CITIES REALTY. Our business and our trademark is regarding ALL CITIES REALTY®.

NEW - 11/26/2006 - Its amazing just how much BS comes out of this Re/Max office. I truly feel sorry for the agents there that must put up with all the falsehoods and rhetoric that comes from the management there.

I think Kelli Amundson has told us that Bob Todd has retired about 5 different times since his license was revoked in 1995 (Yes you still see him on the management pages, in their in-house periodicals, he is still the team leader for the Commercial brokerage, and he is still running the show!). Her (Kelli Amundson's) Lore Magazine interview she states Bob gave up his license... giving something up and having it REVOKED (because of loan fraud) are two totally different concepts. Read her article - if you have the slightest knowledge of the truth of any of these matters it is a real HOOT!

READ - Lore Magazine letter Kelli Amundson wrote to Lore following her Lore Magazine Interview where she states FBI, loan fraud and bankruptcy. Is she proud of all these things? Companies should manage their money better and NOT get into bankruptcy!!!! Company founders should not commit loan fraud and keep working at the company as an ICON that boldly states you can work here even if you are convinced of loan fraud! This is like letting Ken Lay manage Enron after his conviction!

READ - Robert K. "Bob" Todd's recent interview with a franchise magazine in just November 2006. Tells us publicly that he is finally retiring - its now November 2006. Interesting the most real estate companies would not let you CLOSE to their organization if you were convicted of loan fraud!!! Let alone all the people who work there in management with licenses revoked. Amazing place this Re/Max and to think they are the biggest one in California.

NEW - 9/6/2006 - My attorney provided me with a copy of the latest Re/Max missive regarding the upcoming motion to stay the State legal action. I have the copy right in front of me.

My reply is:

FIRST- Law suits are won in court with "evidence", not a bunch of puffery, hot air, or superfluous information. We have PLENTY of evidence that Re/Max and the agents have been doing exactly what we say they have since early 2003. We have made copies of all the infringements and have the hard copy information that will prove our case in court. Trademark law and trade name law does not say you must have big offices and 100s of agents to have a trademark. It also does not say that you can pirate a mark if you do have big offices and 100s of agents.

SECOND - Let me tell you what this will all come down to: did they, or did they not - violate our IP rights, infringe on our common law mark, our corporate mark, or our federal trademark. All the rest of this rhetoric is just smoke and mirrors, i.e. SPIN. The law is the law.

THIRD - We have been in business since 1996. We have all the DBAs, the FBN Statements, the published and filed DBAs, the State Incorporation with our name ALL CITIES REALTY, and a Federal Trademark ALL CITIES REALTY. You could not protect your name more than we have.

Do they really think they [CF Real Estate Loans, Inc.] can throw a Re/Max in front of our Federal Trademark ALL CITIES REALTY and just take it?

Think about that... then EVERY trademark would be in constant jeopardy of being pirated by big companies. Big companies would just take whatever trademark they liked whenever they liked. Folks, a big company just can't do that. If that is the case this court case will write a new chapter in the Trademark History books. Put your thinking caps on. Secondly, they are going to try and attack the validity of the mark. So you see... they are grasping at straws here - not that they have not infringed on the mark, but the mark is no good in some way or another. It's good, and it's correct, and it's protected and that is why we have TRADEMARK LAW.

The KEY to any litigation is being able to PAY to defend your mark and for the litigation. WE HAVE THE MEANS TO TAKE THIS TO THE END AND WE WILL.

Many if not MOST of the statements being made about us are 100% FALSE. MOST if not all that is said in these Memorandums and emails is false, misleading or skewed, and that will be proved.

People don't believe what you hear from CF because you can not count that it has a sliver of truth to it.

Examples:

#1 - Holly Thomas in her August 22, 2006 memorandum states that WE refused to be deposed! What hogwash! My attorneys (August 1, 2006) sent a letter to have several people deposed: Bob Todd, Kelli Amundson, Dale Eleniak, Byron Rife, Stewart Hoffman etc. (weeks before they wanted to depose me). THEY WOULD NOT PROVIDE THEM FOR DEPOSITION!!!

Now WE are having to compel them (have the court force them) to come in for their depositions. Hey, if they have nothing to hide let them come up and they can start answering questions under oath. Simple as that.

#2 - We served just 10 people with summons at open houses. Now why would Holly write 20? She would know would she not? And of that 10 about half did not have any one there, but the agent.

Its not going to matter when or where you get a summons, you are going to be shocked. Nevertheless it appears they [management] told you all that we were bad people harassing etc. TOTALLY UNTRUE! You know why I know this? I watched the whole thing to make certain it was done properly and respectfully.

#3 - They sent some guy, Loren Wallace, all the way from Canada to my office to spy on us?

Loren Wallace catches me there early in the morning when not a soul was there. Not even a car in the parking lot! Then he takes photos of my lawsuit files on the floor?

He writes a declaration of what he (supposedly noticed at our offices) and Re/Max's attorney includes it in his motion to stay the case.

If you read his declaration you will see that he states my office size is 40% of actual, forgot to mention the NEW Starbucks on the corner, the NEW Subway on the corner, that we are at the corner directly across from the Orange County Fairgrounds which gets 1,000,000 visitors in just three weeks during the fair, at least 10,000 visitors every weekend for Orange County Market Place and its even located right on Newport Boulevard, a very busy street that is an on ramp to the 55 freeway ALL the beach traffic coming from Newport!

Yet, this man swears to a declaration, under penalty of perjury, like we are some tiny office in some ancient Industrial center in Podunk, North Dakota, and then misleads the court into believing that we are something that we are not.

Why? To sway the court with inaccurate statements. Judges aren't stupid. What are these people thinking?

Impressive I must say... bringing a spy all the way from Cambridge Ontario to take a photo of my office. Just more malarkey. You would think she would send someone FAMILIAR with the area to get an accurate portrayal of my office location and maybe come at "business hours" when we would have been ready to receive him.

I was very busy and it was early morning about 7AM... At the door he immediately told me that he was not interested in my services - so why would I invite him in? He asked me what I was doing and I told him that I was getting ready for a big lawsuit... at least part of what he says in his declaration is accurate. What kind of reception would I get at ANY real estate office at 7AM? He told me he wanted to buy the shopping center but what he was doing was "secret" and he could not tell me more. I told him the owners were friends of mine and would not sell. Better than that Kelli, in one of her declarations, said we never even had an office (humm).

Loren Wallace has just earned himself a subpoena when Federal Court time comes and he can fly down all the way from Canada to appear. He can then tell the court who he is, why he came, who asked him to come, what his relationship is with Kelli Amundson, what his relationship is with Re/Max ALL CITIES REALTY and his relationship with Re/Max International and just why he wrote such a BIAS, fictitious, and inaccurate declaration. We will get to the bottom of it in Court. We know who he is.

#4 - Here is just a simple example of how Re/Max just can't get their facts straight. The DRE database clearly shows them having 19 branch offices. Kelli Todd-Amundson's emails I have in front of me state 14 offices. Holly Thomas' memorandums show 15 offices. In Ms. Todd-Amundson's sworn declaration to the court on August 3 in paragraph 5 she swears that CF has 11 offices. So what is it? The DRE 19? Kelli's 11, Kelli's 14 or Holly's 15. The Re/Max All Cities Realty [ now Re/Max marquee partners ] website clearly shows 14 - I'm really confused.

Paragraph 4 of her August declaration states 481 agents under contract, yet her email to you folks of August 3, 2006 states she has 572 current agents. The www.realestatelosangeles.com website boldly states approaching 700 agents and the rosters we have scanned had about 679+/- agents in December 2005. The current DRE database shows 394 salespersons. Are we talking agents or brokers... I'm confused again. Considering all the agents that have come and gone over four years we were able to take the agent list off of the DRE list, the rosters, and the website that is the reason for so many agents and brokers on the State complaint.

#5 In her latest declaration Ms. Amundson is now claiming that I am purposely (that would be breaking the law) altering documents and changing people's emails etc. FALSE! Never would I or any one on our side of this litigation present FALSE evidence of any type. Ms. Amundson's claims tells you how seriously desperate she and CF are in this matter. The LAWS are clear and she better be more careful about her false and misleading accusations.

Ms. Amundson claims I am altering emails (that would also be against the law). Ms. Amundson should read up on computers a bit more and educate herself so she does not get herself in trouble. The emails that Mr. Benveniste has sent and continues to send to me must contain some kind of graphic or image. Ms. Amundson should know that many if not most email programs AUTOMATICALLY block images! This is so viruses to computers cant be sent that way. Apparently the AOL software does this and this example sent just today shows that Mr. Benveniste clearly uses our mark that he is using without authorization. Apparently the email software blocks his image - NO Re/Max appears on my emails. CLICK HERE for true and correct PDF file print of the email I received just a day or two ago. Another FALSE statement from Ms. Amundson and clearly a violation of our mark.

#6 In her latest declaration Ms. Amundson states that CF offered to stop using our name. What? FALSE! We asked for years and they never offered to stop. They only exponentially promulgated the use of our name over time. Contrary to what Ms. Admundson states Mr. Dale Eleniak was practically laughing in our attorney's face when we filed the Federal legal action. We have his unsettling letters for the court and the jury. Funny, he was more concerned about our previous attorneys grammar, than the LAW. I understand he is no longer with CF.

#7 In Ms. Amundson's last declaration she said CF does no business in Orange County. FALSE again. CF has done PLENTY of business in Orange County. We have the PROOF. One agent alone has more than 25 listings. Is Kelli out of touch with reality? How many purchases in Orange County have CF agents been the buyers agent or referrer since 2002? How many properties have CF agents listed in Orange County since 2002? If it is ONE PROPERTY then she can not make such inaccurate statements.

#8 In Ms. Amundson's attorney stated to the paper "the trademark is just three generic words". Has this man looked at the Federal trademark register lately? They [word marks] for the most part are ALL made up of GENERIC WORDS in an un-generic way. Or are they unique words? Are words generic or are they unique? The word AND is not the word BUT so I guess they are not so generic, maybe they are unique. To me words are unique not generic.

Did you know that someone had the mark Remax before Remax?

No one registered the trademark ALL CITIES REALTY before us. The Federal Trademark attorney accepted our mark.

Interesting trivia...

REMAX Clothing 1968

Word Mark REMAX
Goods and Services (CANCELLED) IC 042. US 101. G & S: RETAIL CLOTHING STORE SERVICES.
FIRST USE: 1968-07-10.
FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 1968-07-10
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Design Search Code Serial Number 73129022
Filing Date June 3, 1977
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Registration Number 1083005
Registration Date January 17, 1978
Owner (REGISTRANT) Remax, Inc. UNKNOWN Statesville NORTH CAROLINA
(LAST LISTED OWNER) REMAX, INC. CORPORATION NORTH CAROLINA 1416 SHELTON AVE. STATESVILLE, N.C. 28677
Type of Mark SERVICE MARK Register PRINCIPAL

REMAX Real Estate brokerage 1977

Word Mark REMAX
Goods and Services IC 036. US 100 101 102. G & S: real estate brokerage services.
FIRST USE: 19770101.
FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19770101
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING

There is plenty more. Don't worry folks - the truth and the facts, in HARD COPY, will all come out in court.

You can't take what Re/Max ALL CITIES REALTY (that includes Kelli, Bob, Dan and the whole group there) says a face value. Period. Investigate what they tell you.

Do any of you have copies of any of this garbage they are giving the court? What they are feeding you is bunk. If you don't have copies DEMAND copies because you will see a much clearer picture. If you work there you should know the truth. But maybe not. Did they tell you for the last year there was a FEDERAL LAWSUIT regarding the name ALL CITIES REALTY? Gee, if they did not tell you and they encouraged you to use the name, and you get sued because of that, who's fault would that be? It would still be your fault.

IF THEY ARE DEFENDING YOU, MAKE CERTAIN YOU GET A CONTRACT IN WRITING SPELLING OUT EXACTLY WHAT THEY WILL DO. We have seen their nonsensical ambiguous defense tenders.... amazing that you would sign something as useless to you as that!

Don't be a Re/Max SHEEP and let them lead you off the cliff !
READ THIS Our first Motion against them Good Read! 3/13/08

KEEP ALL YOUR EMAILS AS EVIDENCE - YOU ARE REQUIRED TO BY LAW

Dale Eleniak WROTE HIS OWN LETTER TO THE COURT saying that he reserved the right to his own attorney at THEIR EXPENSE!!! - Why would you not do this??? Mr. Eleniak is an attorney - he knows what he is facing. Before you sign anything GET your OWN attorney to give you some advice. SEE the motion above - this fact is stated there. It also states that they, this Re/Max, SUED DALE ELENIAK! That should wake you up! I'll bet they never told you this!

NO PROMISES OR AMBIGUOUS DEFENSE LETTERS - GET A REAL DEFENSE CONTRACT DRAWN UP BY YOUR ATTORNEY - their attorney, or their in house attorney is NOT your attorney. Get your own attorney.

• Can you obtain your own attorney at their expense?
  (they said they would defend you and they did not specify how so you should have that option)
• Exactly how much in attorney fees will they pay? (make sure the attorney bills them, not you - and that it is in the contract that THEY are the responsible party for the legal fees - NOT YOU)
• How much do they have in CASH to pay the judgment for everyone? (get that in writing)
• What if they file corporate bankruptcy AGAIN? Will you be forced to file bankruptcy too?
• If they file corporate bankruptcy what will happen?
  (the second lawsuit is against all the agents - their attorney said in court (if Re/Max is guilty.. they are all guilty) - we already knew that, but you might not. You may have your own defense though.

ASK AT LEAST THESE 12 IMPORTANT QUESTIONS

WHATEVER YOU DECIDE - GET A CONTRACT SPELLING OUT EXACTLY WHAT THESE PEOPLE WILL DO FOR YOU.
YOU HAD TO SIGN A CONTRACT TO WORK WITH THEM, A VERY CONCISE CONTRACT.
IF YOU CHOOSE A FREE DEFENSE GET A CONTRACT - NOT PROMISES!

HAVE YOUR PERSONAL ATTORNEY (NOT ASSOCIATED WITH REMAX) ADVISE YOU ON IT BEFORE YOU SIGN!

1. HOW MUCH $$$ ARE THEY GOING TO INDEMNIFY EACH OF YOU FOR? WHAT AMOUNT OF MONEY?
2. EXACTLY - WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO FOR YOU? LAWYER, APPEALS, PAY JUDGMENT?
3. HOW THEY WILL PAY FOR 1000+ AGENTS AT ONE TIME WHEN A JUDGMENT IS RENDERED?
4. WHEN THEY LOSE - DOES THAT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN YOU LOSE? THAT IS A BIG QUESTION!
5. WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO PAY THE JUDGMENT WHEN YOU LOSE? THAT DAY?
6. HAVE THEY SET UP A TRUST FUND TO COVER EVERYONE NAMED IN THESE SUITS?
7. WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING TO COME FROM TO PAY JUDGMENT? THEY ARE NOT INSURED FOR THIS.
8. WHAT IF THEY LOSE AND FILE CORPORATE BANKRUPTCY? - WHO EATS IT THEN? YOU DO!!!
9. WILL THE OWNERS (KELLI AND BOB) PERSONALLY INDEMNIFY YOU? PERSONALLY GUARANTEE THE MONEY? MAKE THEM PROVE THEY HAVE THE MONEY!
10. WILL THEY WANT TO TRY AND APPEAL A LOSS AND MAKE LITIGATION TAKE 10 YEARS?
11. WHAT IF THEY TELL YOU THEY WON'T FILE BANKRUPTCY BUT THEY DO ANYWAY? WHERE ARE YOU THEN? SEE #8.
12. WHAT IF YOU THINK THIS IS THEIR FAULT - WHAT CAN YOU DO? (YOU MIGHT NOT ASK THEM BUT AN ATTORNEY)

    THERE ARE 100S OF IMPORTANT QUESTIONS... A FREE DEFENSE COULD COST YOU A LOT IN THE END...
    HOW CAN YOU POINT THE FINGER AT THEM FOR PART OF THIS MESS WHEN THEY ARE DEFENDING YOU??

    There are 3 sides to this lawsuit, either you take their side and let them try and defend you, using their defense, you take your own side and get an attorney because you have your own story to tell, or take our side and help us out.

    The ONLY way you are going to get proper legal defense that will be in YOUR BEST INTEREST is to GET YOUR OWN ATTORNEY or a group of you get an attorney who will defend all of you. These Re/Max owners are not going to fall on the sword for you for their personal or corporate actions. Basically, if you allow them to defend you, you will not be able to claim a DIFFERENT defense then theirs.
    
    SIMPLY SAID...
    THIS IS WHY EACH DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE THEIR OWN ATTORNEY - TO PROTECT THEIR OWN BEST INTEREST.
    
    OTHER OPTIONS

1. MAYBE ANOTHER ATTORNEY WILL REPRESENT YOU IN YOUR BEST DEFENSE AT NO COST?
2. MAYBE YOUR E-AND-O INSURANCE OR HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE WILL COVER YOUR DEFENSE - CALL YOUR INSURANCE AGENT.

Just like having a buyer agent and seller agent - one agent can NOT do the best for both the buyer and the seller. In a legal action this is why EACH defendant usually gets their OWN attorney. Because each person has there own set of circumstances and only their own attorney who defends them and only them can and will give them their best defense.

Think very hard about a "free defense" as it may not be in YOUR BEST INTEREST. At the minimum consult with an attorney who is not involved in this case for a unbiased opinion.

            OTHER ISSUES

• A judgment will go on YOUR credit record immediately.
•  

Your Legal Defense #1
12 Important questions you must ask before you count on a FREE defense!

GET IT ALL IN WRITING, IN A "REAL" CONTRACT drawn up by a REAL attorney who will draw one up in YOUR FAVOR. NOT an attorney who works for Re/Max. That is your prudent protection. Same reason you have a buyer's agent and a sellers agent.

I don't want to see you folks get hurt by false promises. Business is business, get a contract and a good one at that. Promises promises... remember talk is cheap!

Your contract for legal services from Re/Max All Cities Realty should be at least as good as the contracts you use to sell a home! Would you sign an agreement to buy a home with a one paragraph totally ambiguous contract? NO! Better think about that one.

If we get a judgment against you (we hope it does not go that far) then we will be collecting from YOU and, YOU will need to collect from Ms. Amundson (has she told you this?)

So you better make certain YOUR attorney (not hers) writes up the contract for indemnification, how much she will Indemnify you for, and when she will pay, who makes the decision to pay or appeal etc. This case could go on in court for 10 years and you will have this hanging over you the entire time. Make certain you get everything in writing and reviewed by an attorney who will review in YOUR best interest.

MAYBE she could set a REAL TRUST FUND with money in it for indemnification. So she can show you all that she REALLY has the money to indemnify you ALL. What if she just decides to claim bankruptcy? I believe CF claimed bankruptcy before. YOU better protect yourself.

I have to say that is a really BOLD statement about her indemnification. I hope it comes with PROOF, AND AN IN-DEPTH CONTRACT. YOU WILL NEED SOMETHING Concrete not that totally ambiguous letter she had you all sign. Have you looked at a contract to buy a home lately? Gee, you would need something like that don't you think... that spells everything out? Please get yourself a contract.

If you are involved in this legal action do yourself a favor and DEMAND a COPY of EVERYTHING that is filed for both sides and READ IT! The truth you will then see.

The history

We asked Re/Max to STOP using our name for years! We have all the emails. We have responses from Stewart Hoffman all the emails sent to Bob Todd, Kelli Amundson, Dale Eleniak and Stewart Hoffman and others.

The apology and release of the domain name www.allcitiesrealty.net which they used to advertise using our mark. We then scooped the domain up after it was finally abandoned by Re/Max.

The reality

Folks, when you get to court we all are equal. We have the evidence, we have the law on our side, and I am sorry to say be we will take this to the very end if we must. We are not doing this for fun, or for a hobby and we are not vexatious. We are doing this because we have been wronged, we have asked Re/Max to quit for YEARS, and now we will let the court decide who did what to whom.

Law suits are all about whether someone BROKE the law or not - it does not have to do with who drives a nicer car or who has a prettier office, or who had more offices. Have you read about the Blackberry patent infringement? If not, why don't you catch up on what happened in that recent litigation. It's a good read and a good story. It is a story about another little guy who sued a big guy becasue the big guy took what the little guy had.

Advice

If you are involved in this legal action do yourself a favor and DEMAND a COPY of EVERYTHING that is filed for both sides and READ IT! The truth you will then see! You have EVERY right as a defendant to READ thoroughly the Malarkey they are spreading.

Get the truth - get the documents for every thing they file. Read them thoroughly because YOU are a defendant. CF, the INTERVENOR is an intervenor, that does NOT change the FACT that every person named in the legal action is STILL a defendant. I don't know what they are telling you, but the fact that all the agents are still defendants has not changed.

Maturity

Do you really think we would have filed this action if we did not have the EVIDENCE NEEDED, THE LAW IN OUR FAVOR and had not had consultations with 10 of the best trademark litigators on earth?

We are not puffing out our chest. We have been damaged. We tried to be nice and that did not work. If CF would have ceased using our name when our attorney wrote the first letter (after years of emails), this would have never happened. We are the good guys here not the bad guy. We are in the right and we will defend our name until the end. This law suit is not malicious, not vexatious, not something I do for fun, or for a living. This not something that I ever want to do again. But I must defend what I have created, the intellectual real estate we own, and the right to proceed with our dreams, and our goals. Sorry, but I just can't let Re/Max take away all that just because they want my name - its not just a name, but 10 years of my life and we will fight the battle to the end.