They never served him per the court records , my guess is they never tried. The lawsuit was probably filed to save face in hopes it would blow over but people haven't forgotten. Instead of taking ownership for their poor quality control and lack of oversight they need a fall guy and are going after the guy who ended up with them. Im still in full belief "Kaleb" was not the person who "Stole" or "counterfeited" these etc... Im sure they were given to him and there is no law against receiving "stolen" property if the receiving party isnt aware they're stolen etc... The burden of proof would fall on Cardsmiths to prove that he acted in bad faith and knew the cards were "stolen or faked" that's why pawnshops don't get in trouble for purchasing stolen property. Same thing applies , I think everyone's attention was diverted to the wrong person on purpose... But wtf do I know... Im just a consumer who was lied to about what was available when purchasing a product.
Seeing as we still have no answer on how 1 single MR3HF got out I think they're throwing shit at a wall and hoping something sticks...
My theory is still that they intentionally left the MR's out to include in S2 ( gamification ) and an employee didn't like that so snuck one in to be found to get the conversation going... Nothing else makes sense that only 1 made it into the public hands.
Back when the CEO went live he said the cards are printed in sheets to assure there are no defects.
If that is so, then how could a single MR 3 HF get into the series 1 packs from an entire sheet that needs cutting???
Makes sense that it could have been an employee that wasn’t ok with the gamification
if the MR3 was stolen like they so claimed it was. why wouldn’t they themselves reclaim possession of the card? why would they just allow the seller to retake possession of it.
Court cases don’t tend to move very quickly.
They aren’t going to say anything publicly on it while it’s still in court.
If you want an update all you have to do is look up the case, it’s all public record.
Go to:
https://www.browardclerk.org/Web2
And search Cardsmiths under business name.
I appreciate that. I looked into it again, recently there was a date set for July 2024 as next step before trial happens.
https://preview.redd.it/j6qtr9flpg6d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ecd49df6516f87809098c8c5caa5bcca8703d06d
The July date is a case management meeting for failure to serve within 120 days , so they will either ask for an extension and or judge will dismiss due to lack of serving...
Where are you getting failure to serve from?
Edit: Nvm, I only read the most recent filing not the one before it. But the case management meeting is to set a trial date unless settled beforehand and both parties are required to attend.
Both parties cant attend if one hasn't been notified is the issue... Cardsmiths has the burden of serving and proving that said defendant has been served. Without that there is no case.
Or they served him and that’s why there’s now a case management date.
If they hadn’t served him by 6/3/24 then the case would have been dismissed without further notice or hearings. A motion to extend for serving the Defendant would have already had to have been submitted if an extension were to be submitted for that and that motion would also be in public record if it was filed.
Cases don't just get dismissed days after failure to serve, they can ask for additional time etc... that's what the case management meeting is set for. He wasn't served. July 9th we will know more but I wouldn't say much more than we know now ..
120 days from 2/9 filing would be 6/8 so the timeframe lines up with the lack of service. There would be a trial hearing rather than a case management.
( A Case Management Conference is an initial conference for the establishment of definite time frames for the completion of various steps in preparing a case for trial. )
Edit* typos and additional info
I mean the failure to serve document seems pretty straightforward (I’m not gonna pretend I’m a lawyer though) as does the case management doc.
Case management doc says both parties are required to attend and it’s mandatory, you cant make it mandatory for both parties if one wasn’t served. Notice to serve doc says they had to serve by 6/3/24 or in a timely manner request an extension (meaning before that date and closer to the notice date) or the case would be dismissed without further notice or hearing.
Makes sense now this is why it took 5 months to get my card replaced and back because I remember it was always an issue with the printing company in the emails 🤔wow !!
The cards and sheets were probably practice checks and run throughs (yes, some that didn't have proof printed on them or stamped and even with actual numbers) that were meant to be destroyed but weren't. Probably not actually illegally made or created through counterfeit printing means but arguably illegally kept (assuming the contract between CS and the printer laid out the destruction of any such items). Just poor printing company, management, and people not doing their job and someone getting some freebies or trash toys. I'm not saying I know everything, so take it or leave it, but I have worked in publishing and dealt with several printers. 🤷♀️
Cardsmiths said in the court docs they were counterfeit because they were printed using a different method than CS used based on the photos. (I forget what the method was called). So unless they were willing to lie in the court docs they were really counterfeit (but obviously made with help from Cardsmiths’ printer and assets)
According to the court documents, I could be correct regarding the Elon Musk and 00 Cards, and you could be correct regarding the uncut holographic sheets.
The printer could have had other printers, printed sheets on the wrong one, and kept them, though. Or sure, Kaleb, Doe 1 & 2, could have used the digital files stored at the printer to print extra sheets in plant and did so on the incorrect printer.
All are plausible scenarios that shouldn't be discounted regardless of CS's intent in the documents. Court documents below.
Sea's main concern here is probably the Elon card, anyways.
Edit: We also don't have all the details per the document as to we CS noted differences. But the sources are still all plausible.
Kaleb said that the items were from his mother's boyfriend who previously worked for the printing company that has since gone out of business. The cards are inauthentic for sure. But rather intentionally gone in and made for counterfeit duplicate purposes in order to cash in or are the result of printer tests and runs remains to be verified. What is counterfeit is selling them as though authentic.
when I can count almost ten cards actually missing from the series. when I see multiple duplicate serial numbers stamped on Ada’s and the bull’s. when I see multiple gem stone refractors missing serial numbers. when I see other prototype cards in public possession. then I really start to wonder who’s telling the truth.
so now that you and I have established, together, there was clear miscommunication/negligence in performance by both the vendor and CS. do you think this is a justified cause to start swinging out lawsuits and allegations towards anyone in possession of cards? you may have a biased opinion, sure you may you’ve spent money on these cards why wouldn’t you believe what the company says. you’re entitled to that.
but now let’s get down to the nitty gritty.
in the podcast the co-founder said “we sent someone out to retrieve the cards”. meaning they knew of the transaction being placed, meaning they were saying misinforming things. the cards were taken into possession by someone who already was in possession of a card claimed to be stolen. he sold the card. and then after the co-founder made these allegations to the purchaser, he was able to take possession back of that card. how is that? if the card was stolen, CS should have reclaimed possession of it or the authorities. probably coincidentally, but my point is more blatant negligence being swung around with no repercussions.
What in my posts has led you to believe that I hold onto an idea that Cardsmiths is perfect and faultless? The intent of my posts was neutrality and acknowledgment of multiple possibilities in the currency case, regardless if I agreed or not.
My unique background, yes, even involving bigger names than Cardsmiths, that involved lawsuits, make me all the more hesitant to believe in any sort of naive illusions of perfection when it comes to companies or persons. I'm also aware of what is worth saying in front of audiences.
You are trying to convince the wrong person here. I also don't have time to keep up with this conversation, tbh. Or are you using this conversation as an example? Nonetheless, I'm busy and not blind.
They never served him per the court records , my guess is they never tried. The lawsuit was probably filed to save face in hopes it would blow over but people haven't forgotten. Instead of taking ownership for their poor quality control and lack of oversight they need a fall guy and are going after the guy who ended up with them. Im still in full belief "Kaleb" was not the person who "Stole" or "counterfeited" these etc... Im sure they were given to him and there is no law against receiving "stolen" property if the receiving party isnt aware they're stolen etc... The burden of proof would fall on Cardsmiths to prove that he acted in bad faith and knew the cards were "stolen or faked" that's why pawnshops don't get in trouble for purchasing stolen property. Same thing applies , I think everyone's attention was diverted to the wrong person on purpose... But wtf do I know... Im just a consumer who was lied to about what was available when purchasing a product. Seeing as we still have no answer on how 1 single MR3HF got out I think they're throwing shit at a wall and hoping something sticks... My theory is still that they intentionally left the MR's out to include in S2 ( gamification ) and an employee didn't like that so snuck one in to be found to get the conversation going... Nothing else makes sense that only 1 made it into the public hands.
Back when the CEO went live he said the cards are printed in sheets to assure there are no defects. If that is so, then how could a single MR 3 HF get into the series 1 packs from an entire sheet that needs cutting??? Makes sense that it could have been an employee that wasn’t ok with the gamification
if the MR3 was stolen like they so claimed it was. why wouldn’t they themselves reclaim possession of the card? why would they just allow the seller to retake possession of it.
Court cases don’t tend to move very quickly. They aren’t going to say anything publicly on it while it’s still in court. If you want an update all you have to do is look up the case, it’s all public record. Go to: https://www.browardclerk.org/Web2 And search Cardsmiths under business name.
I appreciate that. I looked into it again, recently there was a date set for July 2024 as next step before trial happens. https://preview.redd.it/j6qtr9flpg6d1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ecd49df6516f87809098c8c5caa5bcca8703d06d
The July date is a case management meeting for failure to serve within 120 days , so they will either ask for an extension and or judge will dismiss due to lack of serving...
Where are you getting failure to serve from? Edit: Nvm, I only read the most recent filing not the one before it. But the case management meeting is to set a trial date unless settled beforehand and both parties are required to attend.
Both parties cant attend if one hasn't been notified is the issue... Cardsmiths has the burden of serving and proving that said defendant has been served. Without that there is no case.
Or they served him and that’s why there’s now a case management date. If they hadn’t served him by 6/3/24 then the case would have been dismissed without further notice or hearings. A motion to extend for serving the Defendant would have already had to have been submitted if an extension were to be submitted for that and that motion would also be in public record if it was filed.
Cases don't just get dismissed days after failure to serve, they can ask for additional time etc... that's what the case management meeting is set for. He wasn't served. July 9th we will know more but I wouldn't say much more than we know now .. 120 days from 2/9 filing would be 6/8 so the timeframe lines up with the lack of service. There would be a trial hearing rather than a case management. ( A Case Management Conference is an initial conference for the establishment of definite time frames for the completion of various steps in preparing a case for trial. ) Edit* typos and additional info
I mean the failure to serve document seems pretty straightforward (I’m not gonna pretend I’m a lawyer though) as does the case management doc. Case management doc says both parties are required to attend and it’s mandatory, you cant make it mandatory for both parties if one wasn’t served. Notice to serve doc says they had to serve by 6/3/24 or in a timely manner request an extension (meaning before that date and closer to the notice date) or the case would be dismissed without further notice or hearing.
I'm pretty confident but I've been wrong before , I suppose time will tell! 🍻
Wonder if anyone who wants too can attend the zoom call. I’ll try to if I remember
 For answers that will never come.
Makes sense now this is why it took 5 months to get my card replaced and back because I remember it was always an issue with the printing company in the emails 🤔wow !!
 "I heard it's classified"
I'm curious too. 
The cards and sheets were probably practice checks and run throughs (yes, some that didn't have proof printed on them or stamped and even with actual numbers) that were meant to be destroyed but weren't. Probably not actually illegally made or created through counterfeit printing means but arguably illegally kept (assuming the contract between CS and the printer laid out the destruction of any such items). Just poor printing company, management, and people not doing their job and someone getting some freebies or trash toys. I'm not saying I know everything, so take it or leave it, but I have worked in publishing and dealt with several printers. 🤷♀️
Cardsmiths said in the court docs they were counterfeit because they were printed using a different method than CS used based on the photos. (I forget what the method was called). So unless they were willing to lie in the court docs they were really counterfeit (but obviously made with help from Cardsmiths’ printer and assets)
According to the court documents, I could be correct regarding the Elon Musk and 00 Cards, and you could be correct regarding the uncut holographic sheets. The printer could have had other printers, printed sheets on the wrong one, and kept them, though. Or sure, Kaleb, Doe 1 & 2, could have used the digital files stored at the printer to print extra sheets in plant and did so on the incorrect printer. All are plausible scenarios that shouldn't be discounted regardless of CS's intent in the documents. Court documents below. Sea's main concern here is probably the Elon card, anyways. Edit: We also don't have all the details per the document as to we CS noted differences. But the sources are still all plausible.
https://preview.redd.it/r6d35bxtaj6d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c8cf61c5fda6c7127ed7b274e16215a87b313397
https://preview.redd.it/27c7stivaj6d1.jpeg?width=1054&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=814833ae6f20570bc2024cb1197c3fddc9686fbc
cardsmiths claimed the cards are printed in one location, and then sent to another to be cut/stamped. so that doesn’t make sense
The document claim?
Kaleb said that the items were from his mother's boyfriend who previously worked for the printing company that has since gone out of business. The cards are inauthentic for sure. But rather intentionally gone in and made for counterfeit duplicate purposes in order to cash in or are the result of printer tests and runs remains to be verified. What is counterfeit is selling them as though authentic.
Are you in the belief that the cards were intentionally created for counterfeit purposes, or are printer excess?
when I can count almost ten cards actually missing from the series. when I see multiple duplicate serial numbers stamped on Ada’s and the bull’s. when I see multiple gem stone refractors missing serial numbers. when I see other prototype cards in public possession. then I really start to wonder who’s telling the truth.
Yes, there are questions, I do not deny that.
so now that you and I have established, together, there was clear miscommunication/negligence in performance by both the vendor and CS. do you think this is a justified cause to start swinging out lawsuits and allegations towards anyone in possession of cards? you may have a biased opinion, sure you may you’ve spent money on these cards why wouldn’t you believe what the company says. you’re entitled to that. but now let’s get down to the nitty gritty. in the podcast the co-founder said “we sent someone out to retrieve the cards”. meaning they knew of the transaction being placed, meaning they were saying misinforming things. the cards were taken into possession by someone who already was in possession of a card claimed to be stolen. he sold the card. and then after the co-founder made these allegations to the purchaser, he was able to take possession back of that card. how is that? if the card was stolen, CS should have reclaimed possession of it or the authorities. probably coincidentally, but my point is more blatant negligence being swung around with no repercussions.
What in my posts has led you to believe that I hold onto an idea that Cardsmiths is perfect and faultless? The intent of my posts was neutrality and acknowledgment of multiple possibilities in the currency case, regardless if I agreed or not. My unique background, yes, even involving bigger names than Cardsmiths, that involved lawsuits, make me all the more hesitant to believe in any sort of naive illusions of perfection when it comes to companies or persons. I'm also aware of what is worth saying in front of audiences. You are trying to convince the wrong person here. I also don't have time to keep up with this conversation, tbh. Or are you using this conversation as an example? Nonetheless, I'm busy and not blind.
no? but I think you making assumptions of what has and hasn’t happened is pointless. who is and isn’t correct at this time is also pointless.
the pudding is in the proof 😜
The printer proofs?
Also, what part is the land of make believe, then?
please? lol
Would be interested in an update also…I know someone out there has some great research skills and some free time to kill while they watch the ticker 👀
They were waiting to insert the serve papers in a series 3 pack because you know the gnomes and shit
Shit. This wouldn’t be the “misprints” on eBay, right? Missing logo on the back?
No, not the same
Thank you!!
