Legal Filings

This page documents the full legal record of the $15 billion corporate fraud arbitration initiated by Jorden Hollingsworth. It includes the original demand letter, procedural filings with JAMS, and all submitted documents from both respondents and petitioner. Every motion, response, and exhibit is preserved for public review — from the first filing against DRVM LLC to the ongoing clash with billion-dollar law firms like GRSM and Fisher Phillips.

This page is updated in real time, ensuring full transparency in one of the most significant AI-assisted legal battles in history.

The demand was sent to Maged ”Mike” Boutros ‘s email address, work email address, physical work address, and DRVM‘s email address. Within a few days, I received an email and physical mail from Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani (GRSM), informing me that they are now the representative for DRVM LLC and to proceed all contact through them.

There was no response to my demand so I continued to submit the case to JAMS, which is the arbitration forum that we both agreed to use for this kind of case. I originally submitted a regular demand through the portal. Then, submitted a 64 page amendment with over 100 exhibits which is the core arbitration demand.

After filing the core amendment, I had to make sure that I served 8-10 respondents the entire filing. DRVM LLC, AMJ Services, Maged “Mike“ Boutros, Quten Research Institute LLC (Qunol), Chattem Inc (IcyHot, Allegra), Sanofi-Aventis US (Owner of Chattem and Quten), Ashraf “Peter” Boutros & Deepak Chopra (Co-founders of Quten), and Marie-Laurie Amiard-Boutros. The entire structure is named. That will where they try and get you. If anyone dodges or you can’t track them down, they can use that to get themselves dismissed. A loophole to one of the biggest fraud structures of our time.…

Service was finally done on almost all of them. Getting that loophole closed. So, GRSM started playing another game. Decline representation on the original respondents before the amendment which named the entire structure. If you look back to my first ever legal demand to DRVM, I succeeded service to the supposed CEO of this company. DRM was legally dissolved in the state that I was in. Usually LLCs prevent the CEO from being sued. A loophole to one of the biggest fraud structures of our time.…

AMJ Services was another name I saw on some of the emails with the supposed HR to “Direct Demo,” I knew something was there. So to get to ball rolling quickly with arbitration, I quickly named the front structure. In the legal world, if another company that continues the same business practices is opening right after the closure of the previous business, and you owe money on that specific company, your new company is the successor company. They are liable for any fines or lawsuits.

So, I named the dissolved DRVM. Dissolved as in which means I am able to sue the CEO, pierce the corporate veil. So, Maged “Mike” Boutros and the successor company, AMJ Services LLC, is named in the original demand. So, GRSM was representing the entire first structure at this point. For an entire month without clarifying any representation issue. The official demand literally was addressed to directly Maged “Mike” Boutros.

As soon as I realized the outer layer of the fraudulent structure, and who all was included. I amended my filings and named everyone. GRSM wanted to pull back and have me attempt service on the original CEO and successor company, AMJ Services, while now having to service all of the new parties. Okay. Let’s go.

When the “Hands Off” movement was happening, I saw the same pattern in my case, unchecked power, hidden systems, and no accountability. I thought the timing was perfect. If this case went public then, people would see exactly what it was.

So I gave them the chance to settle. Multiple chances.

I sent a full settlement letter, originally valuing the case at $10 billion, and routed it through their law firm (GRSM). This was literally on April 7th, 2025, near the “Hands-off.”

No response. I amended the valuation to $15 billion, warning that if they kept playing legal games instead of acting in good faith, it would all become public.

While investigating this case, I reviewed the largest corporate frauds in history. The structure and scale of this scheme involving dissolved entities, hidden payroll, and a global pharmaceutical company, is on par with them. That’s why the valuation was set at $10 billion, and later increased to $15 billion based on continued concealment and legal misconduct.

I thought going public would change everything overnight. I believed the truth alone would be enough. I was wrong. 

This sparked a major turning point early in the case. No resolution. Just collision. On the date GRSM decided to confirm receipt of the Fourth Amendment Demand and a follow up, they provided a notice stating they are determining whether they will even represent any party other than DRVM LLC and asked for an additional 2 weeks to determine.

What happens that day is unprecedented… A powerhouse law firm, Fisher Phillips, submitted A Notice of Appearance on DRVM LLC. Hmmmm….. So, two major law firms representing the same dissolved company. The company that has no legal standing because in the eyes of the law, it doesn’t exist.

Okay. I am expecting to be up against multiple law firms in this case. The lawsuit has eight (8) parties. Even JAMS expect this. So, when Fisher Phillips submitted their Appearance. The question was simple. JAMS simply stated “Please advise whether your firm is taking over for GRSM or acting Co-Counsel.”

“ I am unaware of GSRM being involved here. I am assuming they are acting on behalf of one of the others named.” <——-

Wow. A partner at one of the most prestigious law firms in the United States. I have seen the other side of court rooms and even I know you never say “I assume.” Especially when what you assuming is completely wrong. They were right. The other law firm is acting on behalf of one of the others named. Unfortunately for them, they are saying they represent the same shell company as you are appearing for it. So, what this tells me is that there are parties behind the scenes that are making decisions without officially appearing. All eight are definitely behind the scenes. Just all of them are hiding behind one dissolved shell company. That’s malpractice... Fraud on the tribune… Obstruction of the legal process..

JAMS stated multiple times that multiple law firms are saying they are representing the same party without each other knowing. Please confirm who is representing who. Three different times. There has never been a response…

Another legal loophole on one of the biggest fraud cases in our time.. So, I kept pushing..

Now, let’s talk about what happened throughout that time in the email thread. There was quite a few events that transpired during that time That truly have a huge impact on this case. What this case is systematic on a global scale..

On April 8th, 2025, in Exhibit B - Settlement Letter. I mentioned that if no resolution is made in this case, I will proceed with the valuation amendment, as well as filing whistleblower complaints to the SEC, DOL, OIG, & IRS. As the arbitration agreement states, “Employee retains the right to pursue claims before any government enforcement agency.” Just following every line in the arbitration agreement.

On April 25th, 2025, DRVM LLC - the dissolved company at the center of the case - suddenly reactivated its Oregon business license in the middle of arbitration. The entire dispute revolves around the fact that they operated while dissolved, so reactivating now raises serious legal concerns. It points directly to intent, which is what prosecutors look for first. Reactivating after being called out suggest an attempt to cover tracks and obstruct evidence, a major turning point in the case.

Just three days later, on April 28, 2025, I received formal notice from the IRS Whistleblower Office confirming that three separate numbers were assigned to Sanofi, Chattem Inc, and Quten Research Institution. These are not handed out lightly. I am not allowed to comment further, but the IRS instantly acknowledging the claim speak volumes.

Another event happened that day on April 28th, 2025. After pushing on for clarification on who is representing which respondent, as well as the collision between GSRM and Fisher Phillips, GRSM officially withdrew without clarification. Without replacement. That kind of withdrawal usually does not happen. That brings up a lot of questions...

Then on May 14th, 2025, Sanofi announced a $20 billion US investment in jobs and the R&D. This is a company currently named in a $15 billion arbitration case. The timing of this PR move, just after whistleblower confirmation and an entity reactivation, raises clear questions.

——————————————————————————————————————————

Throughout the moment of the law firm collision to the commencement of the JAMS case, there was complete silence from the other side. Through service, through JAMS notices sent to all eight respondents physical address, there was complete silence from everyone. Every respondent is letting the front shell company, DRVM LLC, take charge in the $15B fraud legal case.

Silence, another legal loophole. All of the follow-ups and administrative procedures, Fisher Phillips & the parties were just watching. Had to push at every level because of the silence. For months, just hiding while they are trying to obstruct the entire legal process. (This doesn’t happen to millions of people. We get more charges for waiting or being transparent.) Below is the email thread of the attempts to keep integrity of the entire legal process.

Getting to commencement of the case was more challenging than it needs to be. I thought it would be challenging since there are eight parties named in the arbitration and coordinating all of that. Nope. It was challenging because they were hiding the entire time, and still continue to hide.

When the official Notice of Intent was sent out, the official invoices were sent out with it. Waiver Fees in this kind of case are so hard to get granted. In the official arbitration agreement, it mentions, “ employee must pay arbitration filing fees up to the amount the employee would have to pay to file a lawsuit in court.” I have been court literally hundreds of times due to how the system is. I know something valuable to the people who have been abused by this legal system.

You have to pay all your money to the courts or to your attorneys. If you are poor, they assign a court-appointed attorney to play with your life. If you are the one pursuing the lawsuit and you are the poor one, good luck. They made it a law where you are able to represent yourself, even though the entire legal system laughs at you representing yourself.

They will literally bury the case instead of watching you win. But, they have to let you represent yourself. So, if you are ever poor and representing yourself, there is a thing called a “waiver.” Usually, they will grant this if you can prove it. The clause in the arbitration agreement in short said ”as the court would.” So, I gave the Fee Waiver a try. Official filed and officially got it granted.

Now, the filing fee has to be fully paid by Fisher Phillips. All I did was follow what they made me sign. Once the official invoice goes out, a good rule of thumb is around 10 days to pay it. That did not do so. They would have 30 days before I am able to actually file in federal court. So, I pushed on day 10. There is a rule in JAMS arbitration - Rule 6(e) - where if one of the sides is obstructing the legal process, they can assign the arbitrator (the one who oversees the entire case - what we know as a judge) without any input on who gets chosen. So, on day 10, I tried to invoke rule 6(e), with my input of the arbitrator since I have been the only party keeping the legal case going.

In response, JAMS officially notified all parties that they will issue a final invoice and they will dismiss the case after 30 days of noncompliance. Immediately, Fisher Phillips reported the payment has been made that morning. A day after the obstruction rule was submitted, as well as my nomination of arbitrator.

Please see the AI page to know the full background on this. AI is a core part to building this case. At least for myself. Used for corporate law research, business research, legal strategy, case law, legal drafts. I know the other side is using the best AI models in the world while I’m just using the public model. It was used in place of the entire unlimited resources that the $120B pharmaceutical company has, and the entire legal resources for the most prestigious law firms in the country.

This case is highly technical, complex, and the first documented case of AI being used in favor of a major prestigious law firm by one person. I am one of the most transparent person and I’ll prove that throughout this process. So, let’s have a person who co-authored the actual JAMS Arbitration AI Rules. I want the one who actually wrote the rules so I don’t personally misstep any of the AI rules and it is fully understood how much AI plays a core piece in this entire case. To understand that this is one of the most AI and tech emerging cases in history.

They absolutely do not want this. They want someone who doesn’t see the future of AI. They want someone more procedural and by the book. Not a futuristic thinker. Even though Sanofi is a self proclaimed AI leading pharmaceutical company in the world. Deepak Chopra has his own AI version of himself. The most elite law firms have the most advanced AI legal tools. Even JAMS, the arbitration forum, is the leading technology breakthrough ADR, forum to handle legal disputes.

But when a “Pro Se“ wants to use it instead to playing their traditional legal game, it is an issue and they will put their foot down on it. In their mind, AI wasn’t made for me. It was made for them. Everyone talks about the future, but wants to rely on system from 250 years ago, while they just can dodge the legal system using money, influence, & power. (Because the legal system was actually made for them) So, they officially objected to the nomination of Dr. Ryan Abbott. I figured that completely. I knew they were going to do so. The reason, “ this case does not turn on matters algorithmic design, AI ethics, or emerging technology.” And,
“ uncomplicated Oregon wage dispute.”

A partner of a prestigious law firm, just called this case an uncomplicated state wage dispute. So what about the multiple withdrawals? All of the silence? Why no clarification? Has they even read the demand that mentions this is a multi state fraudulent payroll scheme? Another legal loophole... Minimize one of the most biggest cases in the world right now and try and get it dismissed into a wage dispute regarding one small claim. That is all the legal system is. Legal loopholes on how to get the cases dismissed on technicalities. Not truth… Okay, just have to keep on pushing…

Filed in official response to Fisher Phillips about their objection of the AI background arbitrator. JAMS officially notified all parties that the arbitration agreement that was signed says, “ if parties cannot agree on an arbitrator, the court can assign one.” To notify them when we have agreed or if we have agreed to the strike and rank arbitrator list. Or, to notify them when the court has assigned one.

Finally. Legal grounds to petition a federal court to assign the arbitrator that has the most experience to handle this type of case. The most experienced needs to be on this case that has the best understanding of everything in this case. Another benefit, the biggest one.. It instantly goes public. All of the months that have gone by and the games to keep everything silent. Even arbitration to keep everything buried. Gone. No more trying to get a hold of reporters and trying to convince them. No more getting banned from websites. A spotlight. Global knowledge…

So, I gave them a 48 hour deadline - July 1st, 2025 - to agree on AI arbitrator strike and rank list. That the list has to have an AI & emerging tech background and truly have experience for this type of case. They would have to admit that this is the first ever AI documented case in history and now somebody with experience needs to oversee the case. After that 48 hour period, I will submit to the federal court a Petition to Assign An Arbitrator. Instant spotlight on the case.

I did not expect what came next…..

A few hours after I submitted the Notice of 48 Hour Deadline Email, I received $6,130.10 from DRVM LLC to a bank account I haven’t used in over 6 months. July 1st, 2025. What?…. Completely shocked.. Who sent it? Who signed off on it? Why didn’t it go through legal? What was the actual amount since there is no paystub, no conversation, no court order, no settlement agreement? It was meant to destroy the entire case.. To have it not be noticed or brought up, and they can get the case dismissed on a technicality saying the original wages have been paid. No case. No reason to continue. Really? Right when I was about to submit to the federal court? Another legal loophole to get out of the biggest fraud case in our history.

I officially made it Exhibit 110 in the legal case. I’m not using that. Just because we need money doesn’t mean we will take anything and just go away quietly. Now this is going to be a major turning point in the case. There are a lot more questions now that they tried to derail the entire legal process. Truly, who signed off on it? The next day after the 48 hour deadline, Fisher Phillips agreed to the AI and emerging tech qualified arbitrator Strike and Rank List, with their little condition on it. They also have to have experience in ”Oregon Wage & Law.” That is a given. The rule is that you always apply the state law the work appeared in.

Here is what they are doing. They are trying to agree to the type of case this is to not go federal, but that’s not the words they used. They just will say “Okay, we agree but it is still a small claim.” Again, did they even read the actual 66-page demand of the entire case? This has to do with all 50 states. So, yes this huge structure first cracked open in one little state. But that’s not what this case is about. It’s about the nationwide fraud structure. Which now, you would go by state and federal laws.

Now, at the moment, we are waiting for JAMS to submit the arbitrator list that Fisher Phillips and I will rank and strike based on our preferences. So the moment is here, will JAMS provide a list of arbitrators that are experienced for this type of case, now that we’ve already set the precedent that this one of the first documented cases needing AI and emerging tech experience.

On July 16, Fisher Phillips submitted their official Answer to the arbitration demand. The document denied nearly every allegation in full, including the existence of any unlawful wage practices, disputed the employment relationship itself, and failed to acknowledge the recent $6,130.10 post-termination payment. This omission is glaring, especially given that the payment was made just hours after I enforced a 48-hour deadline for arbitrator selection under JAMS Rule 15(b), and mere days before I was set to file the federal petition. No explanation. No paystub. No agreement. Just silence.

Even more concerning, the Answer was filed solely on behalf of DRVM LLC, a company that was dissolved during key events in this case. Under ORS 63.654, a dissolved Oregon LLC cannot legally maintain proceedings until reinstated. Fisher Phillips filed its Notice of Appearance during the period in which DRVM was legally dissolved. If DRVM had no standing, then who authorized the Answer? Who made the $6,130 payment? These inconsistencies only deepen the concern that unnamed parties are controlling litigation strategy from behind the scenes, without ever appearing on record.

Fisher Phillips also failed to CC the case manager, on the delivery of their Answer—a small but telling procedural deviation. While they did upload it to the JAMS dashboard, they chose to email me directly instead of following the usual protocol. That kind of sidestep matters in a case where every move is calculated.

In response, I issued a follow-up email on July 16 to JAMS and all parties, pointing out the inconsistencies in their Answer, reaffirming the impact of the $6,130.10 deposit, and noting that any further delay or deviation in arbitrator assignment would force me to explore all available procedural remedies. I have waited in good faith for months, and I’ve been transparent every step of the way. They have not.

As of now, we are still waiting for JAMS to issue the strike-and-rank arbitrator list. The moment this list fails to reflect our agreed criteria, or if any more stalling occurs, I will immediately proceed with the federal petition. There are no more excuses left. This case is about corporate deception, procedural manipulation, and a legal system that bends to wealth and power, unless someone refuses to let it.

On July 22, JAMS has confirmed to my follow up that they are now preparing the official strike-and-rank arbitrator list, which is expected to be sent within the next week. I made it explicitly clear that every arbitrator on that list must have documented experience with AI and emerging technologies. That agreement, already acknowledged on the record, makes this the first documented AI-assisted arbitration in legal history. Now the world gets to see who they try to put forward. The moment that list fails to meet the criteria, or if there is any additional delay, I will move forward with the federal petition. This is no longer just about what they’ve done. It’s about whether we let them keep doing it.

The Strike List Was Built to Work Against Me — Even After I Cooperated

On July 25th, 2025, After months of delay tactics from the respondents. I complied with the process. I gave the system one last chance to act fairly. In return, JAMS issued a strike list so mismatched, it borders on deliberate obstruction.

This is not a routine wage dispute or contract claim. This is one of the largest documented healthcare fraud cases in U.S. history, involving:

• Over $15 billion in alleged fraud

• W-2 employees paid under dissolved or non-existent companies

• A complex shell structure used to evade payroll and taxes

• Multiple entities now under federal IRS whistleblower filings

• The first known AI-assisted litigation against a global pharmaceutical company

• And a multinational player at the center: Sanofi-Aventis

Despite all this, not one arbitrator on the JAMS strike list has experience with:

• Healthcare fraud or pharmaceutical compliance

• Federal whistleblower law

• AI in legal proceedings

• Modern shell structuring or dissolved-entity concealment

Instead, I was handed a list of retired judges and attorneys who are undeniably qualified in their respective fields — including wage disputes, employment law, family law, personal injury, probate, landlord-tenant issues, and construction defect cases.

But not one has ever ruled on a case involving billion-dollar pharmaceutical fraud.

Not one has overseen an AI-assisted legal strategy.

Not one has dealt with entity-layered concealment of W-2 employees across dissolved corporations.

Here is the wild part — JAMS has experts in AI, forensics, cyber law, and healthcare fraud. They even co-wrote their own AI arbitration rules. They just didn’t include them. And you really think that’s random?

This isn’t neutrality. It’s misalignment by design.

After the IRS confirmed claim numbers. After I exposed the shell layers. After I built the case with precision and made it public for accountability, this is the list they give me? No one even remotely equipped to evaluate the facts?

That’s not coincidence. It’s engineering.

The Strike List That Broke the Deal

Let’s be clear, the only reason this case wasn’t already in federal court was because both sides agreed: the arbitrator list must include individuals with a proven background in AI and emerging technology. That agreement was made on record. Fisher Phillips agreed. I agreed. And JAMS confirmed it.

But when the list came? Not a single arbitrator on it had AI or emerging tech qualifications. Not one had experience overseeing whistleblower-driven cases, shell structuring, or fraud at the level we’re dealing with. This was not just oversight, this was a betrayal of the framework that kept this case in arbitration. I gave so much respect to jams throughout this past six months as a forum. I brought them a $15 billion pharmaceutical fraud case that could shape their image as a ADR. (Another way to file your legal claims other than public court). And they gave all the power to the ones that are obstructing this entire case for months.

So I immediately set a hard line: JAMS has 48 hours to fix the list. Not seven days, not procedural delays — 48 hours. Because this is not a normal dispute. This is a documented, AI-assisted, $15B fraud case implicating global pharmaceutical power and the misuse of arbitration to silence it.

Later that day, JAMS responded, trying to invoke a routine seven-day procedural window, a move designed to give Fisher Phillips time to object under typical rules. But these aren’t typical circumstances. These arbitrators aren’t qualified, and the entire premise of staying in arbitration was built around the understanding that only properly qualified arbitrators would be considered.

I made it simple: If the respondents agree to Ryan Abbott or Daniel Garrie — the two men who co-authored the JAMS AI Arbitration Rules — I will not petition the federal court. If not, the 48-hour clock stands, and I will file. Full stop.

Instead of acting, they asked Fisher Phillips if they agree. They already agreed to the criteria. The list didn’t meet it. That’s the issue. Now they’re buying time.

The deadline passed. Still nothing.

So I followed through — on July 31, 2025, I filed the official federal petition under 9 U.S.C. § 5. A formal motion to compel the appointment of an arbitrator qualified in AI-assisted litigation, whistleblower law, wage fraud, and emerging technology.

I made it public. I named everything. The shell companies, the IRS claim confirmations, the deposit, the law firm collision, the obstruction, and the tech gap. I uploaded the exhibits. I gave the judge every document — emails, filings, withdrawals, official notices — all in one place. No secrets. Just the truth.

Hollingsworth v. Sanofi-Aventis US et al - 3:25-cv-01342-AB

The petition was assigned to Judge Amy Baggio of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon — a former federal public defender and Multnomah County judge, with a career history of fighting systemic injustice. I don’t know how she’ll rule yet, but I trust that she knows how deep this goes.

And just like that — it’s public. Fully. Unstoppably.

The $15B arbitration case is now in the hands of a federal judge, with whistleblower documentation, AI precedents, and a trail of procedural misconduct all preserved on record. What started as an ignored demand letter is now positioned to expose a global fraud network that’s evaded governments, journalists, and watchdogs for years.

The world will now know the fight that has been going on behind closed doors for the past 6 months. And see the real time suppression of a federal whistleblower against a global pharmaceutical company.

And I’m still here. Every step documented. Every move public.

Respondents Just Filed — And It Says Everything About Power

August 14, 2025 — Federal Case Update

Before the court even granted or denied my IFP (in forma pauperis) waiver…

Before formal service of the petition was completed…

Respondents filed their response. And it’s a 9-page attempt to discredit, deflect, and distort what this case is about.

Let me walk you through what just happened — because this isn’t just about procedure. This is about truth, power, and what happens when a federal whistleblower forces a billion-dollar entity into the light.

Filing Before IFP or Service? That’s Not Normal.

In most civil lawsuits or federal petitions, the process is clear:

• First, the petitioner files.

• Then, the court decides whether to waive filing fees under IFP.

• Only once that’s done, and formal service is completed, do respondents reply.

But here, before any of that happened, the respondents jumped the line. That tells you one thing:

They want to influence the judge before the case even properly begins.

They’re trying to poison the well early — to paint me as unserious, unqualified, and somehow abusing the process… all while I’m simply asking for a qualified arbitrator in one of the most complex whistleblower cases in modern history.

They Say I’m “Not a Whistleblower”

Let that sink in.

Despite:

• Confirmed IRS whistleblower filings (with assigned claim numbers),

• A formal DOL/OSHA retaliation complaint, and

• Thousands of pages of exhibits showing systemic payroll concealment and fraud…

They told the court I’m “trying to recast this as a whistleblower case.”

It is a whistleblower case.

But this is what power does. It denies reality. It tries to strip you of your legal identity — to erase your status, your protections, your credibility — just so they can control the narrative.

They Agreed to AI & Tech Qualifications — Now They Say It Doesn’t Apply?

In prior communications, the parties agreed to choose an arbitrator with experience in artificial intelligence, emerging technology, and Oregon wage law.

Now suddenly, they’re saying that doesn’t apply here. That it’s not relevant. That the arbitrators I proposed — including the co-authors of JAMS’ own AI rules — aren’t appropriate.

Then who is?

They say: a “retired judge.”

Everyone in legal circles knows what that means: procedure over truth. Delay over disclosure. Power over people.

The Filing Is Full of Attacks

They didn’t just disagree. They attacked me. Aggressively.

• They accuse me of creating a “media spectacle.”

• They say I’m “trying to make this case about something it’s not.”

• They imply I’m stirring up trouble, chasing attention, and abusing the court’s time.

Meanwhile, they:

• Secretly paid JAMS over $7,000 off the record,

• Hid behind shell companies

• And now object to the very arbitrators they originally agreed to.

So let’s be honest: this is gaslighting in legal form.

Ask yourself:

• Why file before the case even starts?

• Why pretend I’m not a whistleblower?

• Why try to bury this behind a retired judge?

This is why I’ve gone public.

Because what they’re doing behind closed doors needs to be seen in daylight.

And that’s what this site is for.

To document the truth, no matter how hard they try to silence it.

Notice of Retaliation & Whistleblower Status — August 14, 2025

One day after I submitted a formal whistleblower retaliation complaint to the U.S. Department of Labor under the Taxpayer First Act, Fisher Phillips—counsel for Respondent DRVM—filed an aggressive response in federal court.

This was before:

• The court granted or denied my fee waiver (IFP)

• Formal service had been completed

• The case had officially begun

Their response was meant to discredit me, not to address the facts. It tried to paint me as irrational and conspiratorial—while ignoring the real issue: I’ve uncovered payroll fraud tied to a dissolved shell company used by Sanofi and related entities, and now two federal agencies (the IRS and OSHA) are reviewing my claims.

Why I Filed the Notice

I submitted a formal Notice of Whistleblower Filings and Retaliation to inform the judge:

• I’m a protected federal whistleblower

• Retaliation has escalated since my IRS claims

• The tactics they’re using—social media suppression, shell reactivation, secret payments, and forum manipulation—are now well documented

This is no longer just about arbitration. It’s about whether the federal court will allow those same tactics to continue—or take the first step toward fairness by assigning a qualified arbitrator, as the law requires.

Notice of False Claims — August 18, 2025

After Respondent DRVM LLC filed a response falsely claiming that “several parties were removed from arbitration by JAMS,” I submitted a Supplemental Notice of Record Clarification to correct the record before the court makes any decisions.

Here’s what really happened:

• JAMS never removed any parties.

• GRSM, their law firm, simply withdrew representation for AMJ Services and Maged Boutros — no dismissal occurred.

• I re-served the parties in good faith. JAMS never issued a ruling to remove them.

They also claimed the parties were “unrelated.” But even JAMS’ own documents show AMJ Services and DRVM are the same entity — and Maged Boutros is the CEO of DRVM, the dissolved company that employed me.

This notice wasn’t a reply — it was a factual correction to protect the court from being misled. No arguments. Just truth, backed by exhibits.

They’ve used shell companies, vanished records, and misstatements to stall this case. I filed this notice to ensure fairness and prevent more abuUntil now, the case was stuck in arbitration, shielded from public view. Respondents hid behind one dissolved shell company while pretending the rest were unrelated.

But after they filed a misleading federal response — downplaying the fraud, lying about JAMS, and trying to discredit me — the judge still moved the case forward.

Now, the case is public. All parties are on notice. And they can’t hide behind arbitration anymore.

Judge Approves Service on All Parties & Grants IFP - August 18, 2025

The court just gave me permission to serve every respondent named in my petition not just DRVM, but Sanofi, Chattem, Quten Research Institute, AMJ Services, and Maged Boutros.

This marks a turning point.

Until now, the case was stuck in arbitration, shielded from public view. Respondents hid behind one dissolved shell company while pretending the rest were unrelated.

But after they filed a misleading federal response — downplaying the fraud, lying about JAMS, and trying to discredit me — the judge still moved the case forward.

Now, the case is public. All parties are on notice. And they can’t hide behind arbitration anymore.