Instructions:

111111111111 11111111111111

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

Document Scanning Lead Sheet Oct-11-2012 1:39 pm

Case Number: CPF-12-512563

Filing Date: Oct-11-2012 1:18

Filed by: DENNIS TOYAMA

Juke Box: 001 Image: 03798834

PETITION

IN RE: KURT PHAM

001 C03798834

Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.

}3

OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORIEY (Name,

KurtPham POBox 170431 San Francisco CA 94117

TELEPHONE NO.: 415.215.5241

STREET ADDRESS;

number, and address):

FAX NO.:

SUPERIOR COURT

FOR COURT USE OHL Y

FII-ED SRn Francisco ~ntv Suoerior Court

OCT 11 l012 MAILING ADDRESS:

CITY AND ZIP COOE: 400 MCALLISTER STREET RM 103 SA~j FRANCISCO j CA 94102

CLERK OF THE COURTy BY: DENNIS TOYAMA ~

CASE NAME: ::r '" ! Y ~rY\ ) K <- ,..,J-

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET o Unlimited 0 Limited (Amount (Amount

Complex Case Designation

D Counter 0 Joinder

Deputy Clerk

demanded demanded is Filed with first appearancEfby defendant JUDGE;

exceeds $25,000 or less) . Rules of Court, rule 3.402

Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case: Auto Tort Contract D Auto (22) D Breach of contractlwarranty (06)

D Uninsured motorist (46) 0 Rule 3.740 collections (09)

Other PIIPDIWD (Personal Injury/Property D Other collections (09) DamagelWrongful Death) Tort D Insurance coverage (1S)

D Asbestos (04) D Other contract (37) D Product liability (24) Real Property

D Medical malpractice (45) D Eminent domainllnverse D Other PI/PONoJD (23) condemnation (14)

Non-PI/PD/WD (Other) Tort 0 Wrongful eviction (33)

D D Other real property (26) Business tort/unfair business practice (07) D Civil rights (OS)

D Defamation (13)

o Fraud (16)

o Intellectual property (19)

D Professional negligence (25)

o Other non-PI/POlINO tort (35)

Employment D Wrongful termination (36)

Other .. mlnJmlm .. nl

Unlawful Detainer

D Commercial (31)

D Residential (32)

D Drugs (3S)

JUdicial Review

o Asset forfeiture (05)

o Petition re: arbitration award (11)

D Writ of mandate (02)

Provisionally Complex Civil LltlgaUon (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.400-3.403)

D Antitrustffrade regulation (03)

D Construction defect (10)

D Mass tort (40) o Securities litigation (2S)

o EnvironmentallToxic tort (30)

D Insurance coverage claims arising from the above listed provisionally complex case types (41)

Enforcement of Judgment

D Enforcement of judgment (20)

Miscellaneous Civil Complaint

D RICO(27) o Other complaint (not specified above) (42)

Miscellaneous Civil Petition

o Partnership and corporate governance (21) o Other petition (not specified above) (43)

2. This case is is not complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the factors requiring exceptional judicial management:

a. 0 large number of separately represented parties d. D Large number of witnesses

b. 0 Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel e. D Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts issues that will be time-consuming to resolve in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court

c, 0 Substantial amount of documentary evidence f. 0 Substantial posijudgment judicial supervision

3. Remedies sought (check all that apply): a.0 monetary b. [2] nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c. [2] punitive

4. Number of causes of action (specify): Code of Civil Procedure Section 1296.2 and 1285 5. This case D is 0 is not a class action suit. 6. If there~r any-known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. (You may use form CM-015.)

Date: 1°/ I '/ ILL ' .' L-~~~~====~~~==~~~~ ______ _

NOTICE • Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed

under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result in sanctions.

• File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule, • If this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all

other parties to the action or proceeding. • Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes onlv.

' •• ,of2 FOIm AdcpIed fOf' Mandatory Use

Judicial Council of California CM-OlO (Rev. July 1, 2007)

CML CASE COVER SHEET Cal. Rules of Court, rules 2.30, 3.220, 3.400-3.403, 3.740; Cal. Standards of JUdicial Administration. std. 3.10

www.couttlnfo.ca.gov

ADR-106 AROANEY h PARTY WITHOUT A TTOANEY (Name, Slale Bar number, and address):

urtPam FOR COURT USE ONL Y

- PO Box 170431 San Francisco CA 94117

TELEPHONE NO.: 4152155241 FAX NO. (Optional):

£ralltnw&J2. E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional): kurtpham47@grnail.com ATTORNEY FOR (Name):

SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA, COUNTY OF

OCT 11 2012 STREET ADORESS: SUPERIOR COURT MAILING ADDRESS: 400 MCALLISTER STREET RM 103

CITY AND ZIP CODE: SAN FRANCISCO, C.A 94102 CLERK OF THE COUR~ BRANCH NAME: JFNNIS TOYAMA

PETITIONER: Kurt Pham BY' . Deputy Clerk

RESPONDENT: FINRA,CISC,JPM,SEC, Ulmer&Berne,J .Dunlap,see attached.

PETITION TO D CONFIRM D CORRECT ~ VACATE CONTRACTUAL ARBITRATION AWARD

Jurisdiction (check all that apply):

o Action is a limited civil case Amount demanded D does not exceed $10,000

D exceeds $10,000, but does not exceed $25,000 C pSrU~BE' 2 - 5 1 2 5 6 3 o Action is an unlimited civil case (exceeds $25,000)

NOnCE: You may use this form to request that the court confirm, correct, or vacate an award In an arbitration conducted pursuant to an agreement between the parties that is subject to Code of Civil Procedure section 1285 et seq. and that does not involve an attorney-client fee dispute. If you are requesting court action after an attorney-client fee arbitration award, please read Alternative Dispute Resolution form ADR-105, Information Regarding Rights After Attorney-Client Fee Arbitration.

1. Petitioner and respondent. Petitioner (name each):

KurtPham

alleges and requests relief against respondent (name each):

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Chase Investment Services Corporation (CISC), JPMorgan Chase Co., Lester Friedman, Arocles Aguilar, Mary Ellen Curran, Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), Richard Davis, Reem Shalodi, Ulmer & Berne (DB), Jerry Dunlap

2. Contractual arbitration. This petition requests the court to confirm, correct, or vacate an award in an arbitration conducted according to an agreement between the parties that is subject to Code of Civil Procedure section 1285 et seq.

3. Pending or new action. a. 0 A court case is already pending, and this is a petition filed in that action. (If so, proceed to item 4.)

b. 0 This petition commences a new action. (If so, complete items 3b(1) through 3b(4).)

(1) Petitioner's capacity. Each petitioner named in item 1 is an individual,

o except petitioner (state name and complete one or more of the following):

(a) 0 is a corporation qualified to do business in Califomia. (b) D is an unincorporated entity (specify): (c) 0 is a representative (specify): (d) D is (specify other capacity):

(2) Respondent's capacity. Each respondent named in item 1 is an individual,

[LJ except respondent (state name and complete one or more of the following): FINRA CISC JPM SEC UB (a) 0 is a business organization, form unknown. (b) 0 is a corporation. (c) D is an unincorporated entity (specify): (d) 0 is a representative (specify): (e) D is (specify other capacity):

Fotm Approved for Optional Use Judicial Council of Calfomia

ADR·106[NewJanuary 1, 2004)

PETITION TO CONFIRM, CORRECT, OR VACATE CONTRACTUAL ARBITRATION AWARD

(Alternative Dispute Resolution)

P"IIelof3

Code of CIvIl Procedure. § 1285 et seq.

PETITIONER: Kurt Pham CASE NUMBER: -RESPONDENT: FINRA,CISC,JPM,SEC,Ulmer&Berne,J.Dunlap,see attached.

3. b. (3) Amount or property In dispute. This petition involves a dispute over (check and complete all that apply):

(a) 0 the following amount of money (specify amount): $ 1000000 (b) D property (if the dispute involves property, complete both of the following):

(i) consisting of (identify property in dispute):

(ii) having a value of (specify value of property in dispute): $ (4) 0 Venue. This court is the proper court because (check (a) or (b)):

(a) D this is the court in the county in which the arbitration was held.

(b) 0 the arbitration was not held exclusively in any county of California, or was held outside of California, and (check one or more of the following):

(i) 0 this is the court in the county where the agreement was made.

(ii) 0 this is the court in the county where the agreement is to be perfonned.

(iii) 0 the agreement does not specify a county where it is to be performed and was not made in any county in California, and the following party resides or has a place of business in this county (name of party):

JPM, CISC, FINRA, SEC (iv) 0 the agreement does not specify a county where it is to be performed and was not made in any

county in California, and no party to this action resides or has a place of business in California.

4. Agreement to arbitrate. a. Date. Petitioner and respondent entered into a written agreement on or about (date): October 2009 b. ~ Attachment. A copy of the agreement is submitted as Attachment 4(b) and incorporated herein by this reference.

c. Arbitration provision. Paragraph ___ of the agreement provides for arbitration of disputes arising out of the agreement as follows (either copy the arbitration provision in full or summarize the provision):

no specifics in arbitration agreement on file. Only that all matters regarding U-4 must be made through FINRA Arbitration.

5. Dispute subject to arbitration. A dispute arose between petitioner and respondent concerning the following matter covered by the agreement to arbitrate (summarize the dispute):

Misconduct and Defamation dispute as reported to CRD on Form U-4. These have lead to additional issues that have risen during discovery of these matters.

6. Arbitrator. The following person was duly selected or appointed as arbitrator (name of each arbitrator):

Lester Friedman, Arocles Aguilar, Mary Ellen Curran.

7. Arbitration hearing. The arbitration hearing was conducted as follows (complete both of the following): a. Date (each date of arbitration): July 16, and 17 of 2012 b. Location (city and state where arbitration was conducted):

San Francisco, CA 8. Arbitration award.

a. Date of award. The arbitration award was made on (date): July 20, 2012 b. Terms ot award. The arbitration award (check one or more of the following):

(1) 0 requires 0 petitioner D respondent to pay the other party this amount: $ (2) ~ requires neither party to pay the other anything. (3) D is different as to different petitioners and respondents. (4) 0 provides (specify other terms or check item B(c) and attach a copy of the award):

no expungement based on review of FINRA firm user manual and finding by California Court of no legal misconduct related to temIination.

c. D Attachmenl of Award. A copy of the award is submitted as Attachment 8(c).

9. Service of award. a. The signed award or an accompanying document indicates that the award was served on petitioner on (date): July 20, 2012 b. 0 Petitioner alleges that a signed copy of the award was actually served on (date): July 23, 2012

ADR-106 [New January 1. 20(4) PETITION TO CONFIRM, CORRECT, OR VACATE CONTRACTUAL ARBITRATION AWARD

(Alternative Dispute Resolution)

Page2ot3

e e PETITIONER: Kurt Pham CASE NUMBER:

,-

RESPONDENT: FINRA,CISC,JPM,sEC,Ulmer&Berne,J.Dunlap,see attached.

10. Petitioner requests that the court (check al/ that apply): a.D Confirm the award, and enter Judgment according to It. b.D Correct the award and enter judgment according to the corrected award, as follows:

(1) The award should be corrected because (check al/ that apply):

(a) D the amount of the award was not calculated correctly, or a person, thing, or property was not described correctly.

(b) D the arbitrator exceeded his or her authority. (c) D the award is imperfect as a matter of form.

(2) The facts supporting thj grOIUnds for correcting the award alleged in item 1 Ob(1) are as follows (if additional space is required, check here and submit facts on an attachment labeled 10b(2)):

(3) The award should be corrected as follows (if additional space is required, check here 0 and describe requested correction on an attachment labeled 10b(3)):

c.0 Vacate (cancel) the award. (1) The award should be vacated because (check all that apply):

(a) D the award was obtained by corruption, fraud, or other unfair means. (b) ~ an arbitrator was corrupt. (c) 0 the misconduct of a neutral arbitrator substantially prejudiced petitioner's rights.

(d) 0 the arbitrator exceeded his or her authority, and the award cannot be fairly corrected. (e) D the arbitrator unfairly refused to postpone the hearing or to hear evidence useful to settle the dispute. (1) D an arbitrator failed to disclose within the time for disclosure a ground for disqualification of which the

arbitrator was then aware. (g) 0 an arbitrator should have disqualified himself or herself after petitioner made a demand to do so.

(2) The facts supporting te rOUndS for vacating the award alleged in item 1 Oc(1) are as follows (if additional space is required, check here t/ and submit facts on an attachment labeled 10c(2)):

see attached lOc2

(3) Petitioner 0 does D does not request a new arbitration hearing.

d.0 Award petitioner interest from (date): July 20,2012 (1) 0 at the statutory rate. (2) 0 at rate of __ % per year.

e.~ Award petitioner costs of suit: (1) 0 in the amount of: $ (2) 0 according to proof.

f. 0 Award petitioner attorney fees incurred in this action (check only if attorney fees are recoverable in this action according to statute or the parties' agreement): (1) 0 in the amount of: $ (2) 0 according to proof.

g·0 Award petitioner the following other relief (describe relief requested; if additional space is required, check here 0 and describe relief on an attachment labeled 10g):

Expungement of Form U-4 and punitive, compensatory, nominal, and special damages.

11. Pages and attachments. Number of pages attached: f Date: 10/ t 1 / ( "L

KurtPham J (TYPE OR PRINT NAME)

ADR-106 [New January 1. 20041 PETITION TO CONFIRM, CORRECT, OR VACATE CONTRACTUAL ARBITRATION AWARD

(Alternative Dispute Resolution)

Page3013

Full Respondent list: Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), Chase Investment Services

Corporation (CISC), JPMorgan Chase Co., Lester Friedman, Arocles Aguilar, Mary Ellen Curran, Securities

Exchange Commission (SEC), Richard Davis, Reem Shalodi, Ulmer & Berne (UB), Jerry Dunlap

10(c)ii:

Oversight of FINRA manual in numerous ways including failing to acknowledge a lack of investigation as

required by FINRA rules. Despite this lack of investigation, official Disclosures made affecting Mr. Pham's

professional record adversely. Further FINRA Firm User's Manual clearly states company property and

absenteeism are not reportable disclosures despite any investigatory findings if they are related to

company property and absenteeism. Despite thiS, FINRA panel allowed disclosures without an

investigation and overlooked FINRA's own bylaws. This is an example of exceeding powers entrusted to

FINRA and the panel.

Oversight of Regulatory Notice and Finding by State of California stating Disclosures for termination

should be related to official Misconduct. According to California Law, "misconduct connected with work"

is a substantial breach by the claimant of an important duty or obligation owed the employer, willful or

wanton in character, and tending to injure the employer. (Precedent Decision P-B-3, citing Maywood

Glass Co. v. Stewart (1959) 170 cal.App 2d 719. Despite court finding of no misconduct, disclosures to

this effect were wholly ignored by Panel, as was this ruling. The employer has the burden of proving

misconduct. (Prescod V. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board (1976) 57 Cal. App 3d 29)

Chairperson ignored blatant abuse by Respondent counsel in discovery and witness discussion

The facts supporting the grounds for vacating the award alleged in item 10c(i) are as follows:

Chair inappropriately called for a vote regarding recusal of Mary Ellen Curran during phone prehearing

conference. This vote biased panel and Curran against Claimant which should have remained an

anonymous request subject to Director of FINRA, not panel Chairperson or Panel.

Mary Ellen Curran refused to recuse herself after acknowledging she would do such if asked by parties

after addressing past history with Law Firm in question.

Chair ignored FINRA rule to require appearance for individuals to appear that are registered

representatives.

FINRA Denied Due Process in not allowing subpoenas and not re-assessing number of days needed for

testimony those requested to appear.

Panelist Curran stated incorrectly and in bias against Claimant that Misconduct in California does not

have to be intentional, when in fact Professional Misconduct has elements of intention.

Chair would not allow claimant to question witnesses properly (without documents that Claimant had

ready and available for witnesses and had been admitted as evidence). Not allowed to introduce this

evidence during examination of witness because "they could not see the documents" in question, even

though they were provided in a timely manner for Claimant as was witness list. This is a failure in Due

Process.

Chairperson never addressed lack of email correspondence during discovery from Claimant during

employment with Respondent CISe. Not a single email was produced relating to communication.

Chairperson and Panel ignored documentation that Mr. Pham did not receive the appropriate amount of

breaks during work day.

Had discussions without all parties present at prehearing conferences.

Refused to issue subpoenas in a timely manner and in accordance with FINRA rules of arbitration.

Edited some subpoenas and refused to sign others as a denial of Due Process.

Refused to hear evidence of EDD hearing.

Refused to extend/postpone hearing when evidence supported more dates to be scheduled.

Made no one available to explain documents (no due process) as requested by Chairperson and

Claimant. Chairperson failed to sanction or remedy this situation.

Fraudulent claims made on U-4 including comment of no investigation despite correction of disclosures

due to investigation as admitted by ClSC personnel and evidence.

Award FINRA Dispute Resolution

In the Matter of the Arbitration Between:

Claimant Case Number: 11-01483 Kurt Huy Pham

vs.

Respondent Hearing Site: San Francisco, California Chase Investment Services Corp.

Nature of the Dispute: Associated Person vs. Member

REPRESENTATION OF PARTIES

Claimant Kurt Huy Pham ("Claimant") appeared pro se.

For Respondent Chase Investment Services Corp. ("Respondent"): Jeffrey S. Dunlap, Esq., and Reem Shalodi, Esq., Ulmer & Berne LLP, Cleveland, Ohio.

CASE INFORMATION

Statement of Claim filed on or about: April 5, 2011.

Claimant signed the Submission Agreement: April 5, 2011.

Statement of Answer filed by Respondent on or about: October 24, 2011.

Respondent signed the Submission Agreement: October 3, 2011.

CASE SUMMARY

Claimant asserted the following causes of action: 1) slander; 2) libel; and 3) defamation. The causes of action relate to Claimant's termination of employment from Respondent and information reported on Claimant's Forms U-4 and U-5.

Unless specifically admitted in its Answer, Respondent denied the allegations made in the Statement of Claim and asserted various affirmative defenses.

RELIEF REQUESTED

In the Statement of Claim, Claimant requested unspecified damages for lost wages and for alleged "damage to his reputation and career." Claimant also requested expungement.

FINRA Dispute Resolution e Arbitration No. 11-01483 Award Page 2 of 4

In its Answer, Respondent requested dismissal of Claimant's claims.

At the close of the hearing, Claimant requested: 1) $146,521.95 in lost wages; 2) up to $1,000,000.00 in punitive and other damages; and 3) all hearing costs be assessed to Respondent.

At the close of the hearing, Respondent requested that all hearing costs be assessed to Claimant and an award be entered in its favor.

OTHER ISSUES CONSIDERED AND DECIDED

The Arbitrators acknowledge that they have each read the pleadings and other materials filed by the parties.

The parties have agreed that the Award in this matter may be executed in counterpart copies or that a handwritten, signed Award may be entered.

AWARD

After considering the pleadings, the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing, the Panel has decided in full and final resolution of the issues submitted for determination as follows:

1. Claimant's claims are denied in their entirety.

2. Claimant's request for expungement is denied.

3. Any and all relief not specifically addressed herein, including punitive damages, is denied.

Pursuant to the Code, the following fees are assessed:

Filina Fees FINRA Dispute Resolution assessed a filing fee· for each claim:

Initial Claim Filing fee = WAIVED

*The filing fee is made up of a non-refundable and a refundable portion.

FINRA Dispute Resolution preliminarily deferred the initial claim filing fee. The Panel, at the conclusion of the case, determined that the non-refundable portion of the filing fee in the amount of $250.00 should be waived.

Member Fees Member fees are assessed to each member firm that is a party in these proceedings or to the member firm(s) that employed the associated person(s) at the time of the event(s) giving rise to the dispute. Accordingly, as a party, Chase Investment Services Corp. is assessed the following:

FINRA Dispute Resolutione Arbitration No. 11-01483 Award Page 3 of 4

Member Surcharge Pre-Hearing Processing Fee Hearing Processing Fee

Contested Motion for Issuance of a Subpoena Fees

= $1,500.00 = $ 750.00 = $ 2,200.00

Fees apply for each decision on a contested motion for the issuance of a subpoena.

One (1) Decision on a contested motion for the issuance of a subpoena (1) one arbitrator @ $200.00

Total Contested Motion for Issuance of Subpoenas Fees

= $ 200.00

= $ 200.00

The Panel has assessed $200.00 of the contested motion for issuance of subpoenas fees to Respondent.

Hearing Session Fees and Assessments The Panel has assessed hearing session fees for each session conducted. A session is any meeting between the parties and the arbitrator(s), including a pre-hearing conference with the arbitrator(s), that lasts four (4) hours or less. Fees associated with these proceedings are:

One (1) Pre-hearing session with a single arbitrator@ $450.00/session = $ 450.00 Pre-hearing conference: May 31,2012 1 session

Two (2) Pre-hearing sessions with the Panel @ $1 ,000.00/session = $ 2,000.00 Pre-hearing conferences: January 26, 2012 1 session

June 27, 2012 1 session

Six (6) Hearing sessions @ $1,OOO.00/session = $ 6,000.00 Hearing Dates: July 16, 2012 3 sessions

July 17, 2012 3 sessions

Total Hearing Session Fees = $ 8,450.00

1. The Panel has assessed $4,770.00 of the hearing session fees to Claimant. 2. The Panel has assessed $3,680.00 of the hearing session fees to Respondent.

All balances are payable to FINRA Dispute Resolution and are due upon receipt.

~9rm ln~tance Admin Tool <.T)

Form Information: Tracking #:

Status:

Payment Method:

Payment Type:

TNl100347

Processed

Online Payment

None

Online Payment Status: Payment Expired

11-01483

kpham3

04/05/2011

CASE ID:

Submitted By:

Date Submitted:

Parties:

Claimant Names:

From Form:

KURT HUY PHAM

Respondent Names:

From Form:

CHASE INVESTt-1ENT SERVICES CORP.

Filing Date: 04/05/2011

Existing Comments:

SECTION 1: PERIOD OF DISPUTE

Into MATRICS:

Kurt Huy Pham

Into t·1ATRICS:

Chase Investment Services Corp.

Start Date 312010 End Date Dispute is Ongoing

SECTION 2: PARTIES

2a:Claimants

Name

Type

Mailing Address

KURT HUY PHAM

Person AssOCiated with a Member Firm

26951 Magnolia Laguna Hills United States of America

Ph: Employment Address . at Time of Dispute San FrancISco

JP Morgan Chase

Representative Mr. KURTHUY PHAM 26951 MagnOlia Laguna Hills United States of America

Fax:

California

Ph: 415.215.5241 Fax:

SarlO:

CRD.

California

E-mail:

United States of America

California

E-mail: kurthuypham@gmail.com

Page 2 of5

5000751

92653

92653

http://mtc-torrns.cltnasd.comIFJA T/f'onnDetails.aspx?F onnName=DRClaimlntO&Fonnl... 4/13/20 J I

Bar 10 State:

SECTION 2: PARTIES

2c: Respondents

Name

Type

Address

CHASE INVESTMENT SERVICES CORP.

Member Firm

1111 POLARIS PARKWA Y SUITE 2J

COLUMBUS United States of America

Ph: 614-213-5442

SECTION 3: CLAIMS

3a: DisputeTypes

Dispute Types Employment-Libel or Slander Employment-Libel or Slander on Form U-5 Employment-Sexual Harassment Employment-Wrongful Termination Other-Defamation

BD#

Ohio

3b: Securities. Finane/a/Instruments, anellor Investments involved in the Dispute

SECTION 4: RELIEF REQUESTED

4a: Attorney's Fees, Costs and Inte'"t

Page 30fS

25574

43240

Attorney's Fees: Unspecified Interest: Unspecified Costs: Unspecified

4b: Rel/ef Requests

Clalmant(a) KURT HUY PHAM (Person ASSOCiated with a Member Firm)

Non-Monetary

Respondent(s)

Clalmant(s)

Non-Monetary

Respondent(s}

Claimant(s)

Monetary

Respondent(s)

Injunction From filing a false U-5 CHASE INVESTMENT SERVICES CORP. (Member Firm)

KURT HUY PHAM (Person Associated with a Member Firm)

Expungement Expunge CRD Record CHASE INVESTMENT SERVICES CORP. (Member Firm)

KURT HUY PHAM (Person Associated with a Member Amount is Unspecified Firm)

Other Monetary Relief

CHASE INVESTMENT SERVICES CORP. (Member Firm)

SECTION 5: HEARING INFORMATION

http://mtc-tonns.clt.nasd.comlFIAT/FonnDetails.aspx?FonnNamc''''ORClaimlnfo&FonnI... 4/13/2011

'\ b ~q.rm In,stance Admin Tool (FIAT) Page 4 of5

I am claiming over $100,000 in specified damages and/or claiming unspecified damages, and ur that this case will be decided by a panel of three arbitrators· after an in-person hearing.

·Note: you may request subsequently a different panel composition, but this will happen only if E

agree in writing.

SECTION 6: FEES

6a:Fee Calculation

Total Specified Damages:

Actual Damages: $0.00 Punitive Damages: $0.00

Total: $000

6b: Payment Method

Fee Estimates;

Filing Fee: $1.250.00 Member Surcharge: $0.00

Total: $1.250.00

I will be paying online through the FINRA Dispute Resolution Online Arbitration Claim Filing sySI

Email: kurthuypham@gmail.com

Claimant Submitting Payment: KURT HUY PHAM (Person Associated with a Member Firm)

SECTION 7: ELECTRONIC ATTACHMENTS

I will submit hard copies for service upon respondents and to provide to each arbitrator once the panel ie appointed.

I will attach the Statement of Claim or any supporting documentation (if applicable) electronically.

Statement of Claim

Attached Documents: 1. statem8nt ;:,f r.lam~ d0C~ [Size: 13490; Status: Completed] - Statement of Claim

Supporting documentation

No files attached.