ASM #252 CGC 9.8 Record Sale - something fishy going on? - Holder Tampering Incident confirmed by CGC 50 50

[sledgehammer]

Why is this book, that does not appear to have been on the list, or been crossed off the list, and could not be any clearer to be a Zanello submission, have no grade noted and a grade date of january 23, 2024?

 

https://www.cgccomics.com/certlookup/4329914003/

 

Edited February 13 by sledgehammer

[comeaux]

On 2/13/2024 at 10:28 AM, BrashL said:

Any word on the new  case or some stickers on the old one or something?

Here attached in the link below is the latest I have on the CGC vs ZANELLO & RIVA case. It’s a memorandum of law filed by attorney for defendant ZANELLO in response to the CGC lawsuit. 
 

Memorandum of Law - Filed by attorney for defendant ZANELLO

[comeaux]

On 2/13/2024 at 3:05 PM, comeaux said:

Here attached in the link below is the latest I have on the CGC vs ZANELLO & RIVA case. It’s a memorandum of law filed by attorney for defendant ZANELLO in response to the CGC lawsuit. 
 

Memorandum of Law - Filed by attorney for defendant ZANELLO

defendants have been served and have 21 days from today to submit answer to CGC complaint. 

There was also a preliminary injunction order filed today, here below are the cliff notes:

STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER AND ORDER AUTHORIZING EXPEDITED DISCOVERY: IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that Defendants are hereby retrained and enjoined from engaging in any of the following acts or omissions pending the final hearing and determination of this action or under further order of the Court: as set forth herein. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the attorneys for the respective parties hereto, that within fourteen (14) days of entry of this Order, Defendants shall: as set forth herein. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the attorneys for the respective parties hereto, that within fourteen (14) days of receipt of service of this Order, any third party service providers who are served with this Order, including, but not limited to,eBay, shall identify any and all of Defendants' user accounts and merchant storefronts used to sell products bearing the CGC Marks, and provide CGC's counsel with a summary report containing account details for any and all such user accounts and merchant storefronts, which shall include, at a minimum: as set forth herein. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that Defendants expressly reserve, and enter into this Stipulation without prejudice to, all of their rights, remedies, and defenses to the claims asserted against them, including but not limited to those relating to jurisdiction, venue, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 2/13/2024) (ama) (Entered: 02/13/2024)

[comeaux]

Perhaps one obstacle for CGC in this case may be chain of custody related to any book allegedly handled, sold or purchased by the defendants. 

[BrashL]

On 2/13/2024 at 3:38 PM, comeaux said:

defendants have been served and have 21 days from today to submit answer to CGC complaint. 

There was also a preliminary injunction order filed today, here below are the cliff notes:

STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION ORDER AND ORDER AUTHORIZING EXPEDITED DISCOVERY: IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that Defendants are hereby retrained and enjoined from engaging in any of the following acts or omissions pending the final hearing and determination of this action or under further order of the Court: as set forth herein. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the attorneys for the respective parties hereto, that within fourteen (14) days of entry of this Order, Defendants shall: as set forth herein. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the attorneys for the respective parties hereto, that within fourteen (14) days of receipt of service of this Order, any third party service providers who are served with this Order, including, but not limited to,eBay, shall identify any and all of Defendants' user accounts and merchant storefronts used to sell products bearing the CGC Marks, and provide CGC's counsel with a summary report containing account details for any and all such user accounts and merchant storefronts, which shall include, at a minimum: as set forth herein. IT IS HEREBY FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that Defendants expressly reserve, and enter into this Stipulation without prejudice to, all of their rights, remedies, and defenses to the claims asserted against them, including but not limited to those relating to jurisdiction, venue, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 2/13/2024) (ama) (Entered: 02/13/2024)

Wait, the other complaint against the employees has already been dismissed? Did I miss that or is that new information?

"CGC chose not to bring that suit or its allegations to this Court’s attention, or inform this Court that its complaint in that case, which contains nearly
word for word allegations within the same counts asserted against Defendants here, was dismissed by the court sua sponte as a “shotgun pleading.”

Yikes. Maybe this lawyer for CGC isn't so good after all. This is like Jr. Associate level mistakes

Edited February 13 by BrashL

[DC#]

It's surprising the more judges don't go postal after years of listening to these type of legal arguments back and forth......

[MAR1979]

On 2/13/2024 at 5:21 PM, BrashL said:

Wait, the other complaint against the employees has already been dismissed? Did I miss that or is that new information?

"CGC chose not to bring that suit or its allegations to this Court’s attention, or inform this Court that its complaint in that case, which contains nearly
word for word allegations within the same counts asserted against Defendants here, was dismissed by the court sua sponte as a “shotgun pleading.”

Yikes. Maybe this lawyer for CGC isn't so good after all. This is like Jr. Associate level mistakes

Perhaps it was done on purpose? Great way to make it seem like you are doing something but too fearful of Discovery Process, etc to actually let a suit progress. In effect it's akin to a retraction, something which few ever know about or remember...

Edited February 13 by MAR1979

[BrashL]

On 2/13/2024 at 4:48 PM, MAR1979 said:

Perhaps it was done on purpose? Great way to make it seem like you are doing something but fearful of Discovery Process, etc to actually let a suit progress. In effect it's akin to a retraction, something which few ever know about or remember...

No, it was like a legitimate "I don't know how to write a motion" mistake. They resubmitted it like a day later. Court is waiting for defendants to appear. 

[comeaux]

On 2/13/2024 at 4:21 PM, BrashL said:

Wait, the other complaint against the employees has already been dismissed? Did I miss that or is that new information?

"CGC chose not to bring that suit or its allegations to this Court’s attention, or inform this Court that its complaint in that case, which contains nearly
word for word allegations within the same counts asserted against Defendants here, was dismissed by the court sua sponte as a “shotgun pleading.”

Yikes. Maybe this lawyer for CGC isn't so good after all. This is like Jr. Associate level mistakes

That’s this case vs. ZANELLO wherein CGC attorney filed amended complaint because of deficient documentation and “shotgun pleading”  CGC counsel in this case appears to be struggling with multiple filing errors, I think at least 6 or 7 according to the docket report. Meanwhile the attorney for defendant laid out a fairly compelling argument in his Memorandum of Law. 
 

You’re right, it has been “jr. Associate level mistakes” from CGC attorneys. I follow a lot of cases on Pacer and rarely see this type of attorney incompetence, but then again it’s CGC so I’m not surprised. 

[HighGrade]

The scammers lawyer is quoting the youtube interview. I didn't think that interview helped CGC's image and did nothing to help the case, it's tough, you want to say things but they should not have done it.  It's nothing terrible to the case but it didn't help either so I'm betting we will not hear anything more until the cases are over. We are not going to hear about new security or holders to stop these clowns, or anything more about the list.  The list is important to find the books in question, but a better way would have been to then keep it private between the owners until the case is over.

[comicjel]

Unfortunately, I think that both sides are happy to keep the books in question at the listed 350.

[comeaux]

On 2/13/2024 at 5:45 PM, HighGrade said:

The scammers lawyer is quoting the youtube interview. I didn't think that interview helped CGC's image and did nothing to help the case, it's tough, you want to say things but they should not have done it.  It's nothing terrible to the case but it didn't help either so I'm betting we will not hear anything more until the cases are over. We are not going to hear about new security or holders to stop these clowns, or anything more about the list.  The list is important to find the books in question, but a better way would have been to then keep it private between the owners until the case is over.

Pretty much agree with you on all points except to keep the list private. In my opinion it’s important that all collectors are aware of books that have been manipulated/swapped. 

Edited February 14 by comeaux

[comeaux]

 If CGC was really concerned about collectors of their product/service, CGC should have announced both of these scandals on their facebook & X accounts to ensure all collectors are apprised of what’s happening with the CGC holders & service. 

At this moment there’s no exact number of collectors that have been impacted by the CGC insiders printing fake labels, stealing books & swapping labels. There is also no definitive number of books affected by the reholder scam which likely impacts far more books than were just submitted to CGC. The scammers were likely swapping books and selling to the general public without being reholdered. 

[HighGrade]

What is this garbage??? this is part of the defense? LOL

To prevail on a trademark infringement and counterfeiting claim, CGC must establish that
its marks are protected and that Mr. Zanello’s “use of the allegedly infringing mark would likely
cause confusion as to the origin or sponsorship.” Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee, Inc.,
588 F.3d 97, 114 (2d Cir. 2009). “‘The crucial issue in an action for trademark infringement’ is
whether there is a ‘likelihood that an appreciable number of ordinarily prudent purchasers are
likely to be misled’ or ‘confused’ as to a product source.”

 

What? This is not even close, scammer was not producing his own holder and trademark and calling it say CeGeCe It's absolutely nothing like the Charbucks case NOTHING, they were not using actual "Starbucks" containers, is this a joke? of course the people thought is was CGC graded book and of course they were misled!, it was in the actual CGC holder!! are they serious I could drive a truck through this attempt. Nobody thought yeah, this is not a CGC book, this just Zanello's book, like they did with Charbucks, most people actual did not think they were buying Starbucks coffee...lol, EVERYONE thought they were buying the actual graded CGC book...EVERYONE, complete 100% misled.

Scammer was stealing the actual real product from the actual case and passing off his own book in it! He is not some entrepreneur making something "like" the product and maybe confusing people with it, the scammer confused everyone. 

He USED the actual CGC Trademark LOL, and the actual CGC holder...let me see, it's like going into Starbucks getting a coffee and replacing the coffee with his own coffee after drinking the original coffee, then selling his coffee in the actual Starbucks cup calling it Starbucks coffee, which it is not.  He's not making a holder or even using his own label with a name close to CGC, he's using the actual product to sell his product!

Cause confusion? it's the exact same trademarked CGC name and the actual CGC holder! LOL nothing even close to this......Plaintiff Starbucks sued defendant Black Bear to enjoin it from using its "Mister Charbucks," "Mr. Charbucks," and "Charbucks Blend" marks 

Maybe If the defendant here actually used the name Starbucks, and actually used the Starbucks container, then it would have been the same.

If CGC loses this one..

 

[MAR1979]

On 2/13/2024 at 5:51 PM, BrashL said:

No, it was like a legitimate "I don't know how to write a motion" mistake. They resubmitted it like a day later. Court is waiting for defendants to appear. 

thanks missed that...

Edited February 14 by MAR1979

[bc]

On 2/13/2024 at 8:06 PM, szav said:

Apologies if this is buried in the first 8000 replies somewhere, but what sort of outside independent inspection of certification of CGCs quality control methods are there, if any?  It seems sorely needed.  Many big businesses are subject to all manner of scheduled and unannounced inspections from federal, state, and private entities.

Are they subject to regulation or inspection of any government agencies?  Are they accredited for any purposes by any private firms?

I get that it's just comic books, and historically maybe no one has cared enough to ask the question, but with the mounting scandals and now numerous instances of direct serious financial injury to consumers, one wonders if they aren't inviting themselves to become subject to regulation of their practices.  All they have to do is tick off the wrong well-connected person.  As loathe as I am to suggest oversight or regulation, with the dollar amounts that are being dealt with and lost, maybe it's time.

You'd think they'd be worried about that, you'd hope that they'd have enough incentive on their own to run a tighter ship, but as countless others have said, with an effectively monopoly they are not in any way under pressure to do so it seems.

On the note, who if anyone has oversight of or regularly inspects or certifies the big auction houses?

Or does nothing at all happen and no one even look their way unless they get sued.  Wouldn't shock me to see it happen soon or to find out that it is happening.

Have to single this out as many companies (including my small business) have to deal with multiple ISO/NIST certification requirements, including regular inspections or independent audits. You almost have to in order to work with any semi-regulated industry or supplier.

-bc

[comeaux]

On 2/13/2024 at 7:04 PM, HighGrade said:

What is this garbage??? this is part of the defense? LOL

To prevail on a trademark infringement and counterfeiting claim, CGC must establish that
its marks are protected and that Mr. Zanello’s “use of the allegedly infringing mark would likely
cause confusion as to the origin or sponsorship.” Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee, Inc.,
588 F.3d 97, 114 (2d Cir. 2009). “‘The crucial issue in an action for trademark infringement’ is
whether there is a ‘likelihood that an appreciable number of ordinarily prudent purchasers are
likely to be misled’ or ‘confused’ as to a product source.”

 

What? This is not even close, scammer was not producing his own holder and trademark and calling it say CeGeCe It's absolutely nothing like the Charbucks case NOTHING, they were not using actual "Starbucks" containers, is this a joke? of course the people thought is was CGC graded book and of course they were misled!, it was in the actual CGC holder!! are they serious I could drive a truck through this attempt. Nobody thought yeah, this is not a CGC book, this just Zanello's book, like they did with Charbucks, most people actual did not think they were buying Starbucks coffee...lol, EVERYONE thought they were buying the actual graded CGC book...EVERYONE, complete 100% misled.

Scammer was stealing the actual real product from the actual case and passing off his own book in it! He is not some entrepreneur making something "like" the product and maybe confusing people with it, the scammer confused everyone. 

He USED the actual CGC Trademark LOL, and the actual CGC holder...let me see, it's like going into Starbucks getting a coffee and replacing the coffee with his own coffee after drinking the original coffee, then selling his coffee in the actual Starbucks cup calling it Starbucks coffee, which it is not.  He's not making a holder or even using his own label with a name close to CGC, he's using the actual product to sell his product!

Cause confusion? it's the exact same trademarked CGC name and the actual CGC holder! LOL nothing even close to this......Plaintiff Starbucks sued defendant Black Bear to enjoin it from using its "Mister Charbucks," "Mr. Charbucks," and "Charbucks Blend" marks 

Maybe If the defendant here actually used the name Starbucks, and actually used the Starbucks container, then it would have been the same.

If CGC loses this one..

 

CGC is responsible for this disaster, they held every one of these reholdered books in THEIR HANDS and missed EVERY one of them. 
 

CGC employees did not have proper CGC training to identify this fraudulent activity and I honestly think this lawsuit is going to be an uphill battle for CGC, especially the ZANELLO case because his counsel appears much more vigorous with meticulous detail on the initial pleadings, CGC counsel with 7 misfires out of the gate. 

Chain of custody is going to be very problematic for CGC, they can learn some things about enhanced security which is obviously nonexistent at the moment. 

I can understand some of your points but what I think you are missing is the fact that CGC, the “professionals” in this collectibles arena and their “professional employees” ALLOWED THIS DEBACLE TO HAPPEN through total mismanagement, inadequate processes & procedures, lack of situational awareness, inept workmanship, lackadaisical & cavalier attitude of upper management, improper & insufficient training of employees, unclean hands and inexperienced employees, etc. Discovery in this case will be damaging to CGC business and reputation. If defense attorney for ZANELLO stays strong, CGC is toast with a low profile/private “settlement” and it’s what CGC deserves for the manner they have conducted business and treated customers who deserve better than the chitty service they have gotten over the last few years. 

This along with the fact that it has yet to be explained how ZANELLO & RIVA received preferential treatment such as TAT in three days as well as 9.8 grades with identical grader notes over several identical 9.8 books. 
 

I know all of these facts make the natives restless but the truth hurts irregardless of “muh slabs” and I get it, I still own 100’s of CGC graded books that I hope to sell eventually although I’ll never buy another and just really happy that I sold most high value slabs already. 

[comeaux]

On 2/13/2024 at 7:06 PM, szav said:

what sort of outside independent inspection of certification of CGCs quality control methods are there, if any?  It seems sorely needed.  Many big businesses are subject to all manner of scheduled and unannounced inspections from federal, state, and private entities.

Are they subject to regulation or inspection of any government agencies?  Are they accredited for any purposes by any private firms?

one wonders if they aren't inviting themselves to become subject to regulation of their practices.  All they have to do is tick off the wrong well-connected person.  As loathe as I am to suggest oversight or regulation, with the dollar amounts that are being dealt with and lost, maybe it's time.

You'd think they'd be worried about that, you'd hope that they'd have enough incentive on their own to run a tighter ship, but as countless others have said, with an effectively monopoly they are not in any way under pressure to do so it seems.

On the note, who if anyone has oversight of or regularly inspects or certifies the big auction houses?

Unfortunately the answer is NO!!! There is no oversight at CGC or Heritage. Just look at all of the CGC scandals with trimming, reholdering, insider fraud, Burger King workers printing fake labels, etc, it’s Comedy Gold at CGC right now. The Cole Schave BS that could only happen to those “well connected” within CGC & Heritage as well as the Marvel #1 that went from 8.5 to 9.4   It’s a dumpster fire only sanctioned by the extreme upper echelon of the collecting community.
 

The dedicated CGC members, paying CGC slugs & CGC tribesman get thrown meager crumbs to keep the CGC machine oiled while the collecting community as a whole get bilked by the carnival barkers supporting these “manufactured collectibles” 

Protect this man, you’ve really upset the natives, tread carefully. 

[paqart]

On 2/13/2024 at 6:52 PM, comicjel said:

Unfortunately, I think that both sides are happy to keep the books in question at the listed 350.

And this is why this needs to go to law enforcement.

[paqart]

On 2/13/2024 at 7:03 PM, comeaux said:

Pretty much agree with you on all points except to keep the list private. In my opinion it’s important that all collectors are aware of books that have been manipulated/swapped. 

That would require expanding the list all of Zanello/Riva/CBS submissions. I wouldn't buy anything that has passed through their hands at this point.