This Week in My $15B Case: They Even Went Back on the Judge’s Own Order Case Update

This week, DRVM and its high-priced lawyers at Fisher Phillips pulled a move that tells you everything about how billion-dollar corporations play the system. On the exact day a deadline hit, instead of letting each company respond as the Court ordered, they filed a motion asking the judge to “correct the docket” so that one small revoked/reactivated LLC could magically speak for nine separate respondents, including Sanofi, one of the world’s biggest drug companies.

In plain English: they’re asking the Court to erase deadlines and give everyone a clean slate. If this tactic works, every missed response, every default, and every service attempt disappears. If it fails, it confirms what I’ve said from the start — that they are playing games to dodge accountability, while I follow the rules to the letter. This is where we stand right now: the Court has to decide whether the rules mean the same thing for billion-dollar corporations as they do for the rest of us.

Sanofi and Chattem have now dodged the U.S. Marshals three separate times. These are billion-dollar corporations avoiding the same process every other litigant in federal court must face. To stop this obstruction, I filed a Motion to Deem Service Effective or, in the Alternative, for Court-Authorized Service. That means if they keep hiding, the Court can authorize another method — email, certified mail, or even service on their attorneys — so they can no longer play games.

Meanwhile, the deadlines are already catching up. The 21-day response period for AMJ Services and Maged Boutros has passed, and they filed nothing. Under Rule 55, that is grounds for default. Yet DRVM is now arguing that “defaults don’t matter” here, trying to rewrite federal procedure as if billion-dollar companies can be served and still never answer.

This is part of a broader pattern. Respondents are still hiding the CEO of both AMJ Services and DRVM, even while Fisher Phillips now claims to represent AMJ. Yup. They just filed a Notice of Appearance on AMJ Services on September 19, 2025. Confirming everything. Think about that: they say they represent the companies, but pretend not to know who its CEO is, the same individual across both entities. That concealment isn’t an accident; it’s the very purpose of the shell structure.

On top of that, DRVM’s latest motion twists this Court’s own order. The Court was clear: DRVM’s first filing would stand, but no further pleadings from DRVM would be accepted until all other respondents appeared. Yet DRVM is now trying to turn that ruling upside down, claiming no respondent was ever required to respond and that deadlines just vanish. That’s not only false, it’s a mischaracterization of the Court’s words and a direct disregard of its authority.

And now, Miller Nash, one of the most prestigious law firms in the Northwest, has appeared for Deepak Chopra. They’ve already signaled an intent to move for dismissal. Add that to Fisher Phillips and DRVM’s obstruction, and you see the strategy: not to defend the fraud, but to bury the case in delays, false claims, and procedural games.

The truth is simple: the summonses were valid, the deadlines were real, and the defaults are already in play. Pretending they don’t matter is not a defense, it’s proof of how desperate this case has become for them.

And that’s why this has grown beyond arbitration or wage fraud. It is now a constitutional case. If billion-dollar corporations can be served, miss deadlines, and then have their lawyers argue that the rules don’t apply to them, then equal protection and due process no longer exist in practice. Ordinary people are held to deadlines every day. If billion-dollar corporations aren’t, then we are not living under the same Constitution.

My Opposition to DRVM’s Motion to Correct Docket was one of the most important filings in this case. DRVM, represented by Fisher Phillips, tried to file on behalf of all nine respondents, asking the Court to “correct” the docket as if every missed deadline, unanswered summons, and default could simply be erased. I argued that this was not a correction, it was obstruction, exactly what had been happening throughout arbitration when every respondent hid behind one shell company.

The filing exposed how DRVM, a dissolved and reactivated LLC, was being used as a shield for Sanofi, Chattem, Quten, and the Boutros family, all of whom continued to ignore service while secretly benefiting from the same legal representation. My Opposition showed that each respondent has been on notice since early 2025 and that deadlines can’t vanish just because a billion-dollar network wants to delay accountability. The FAA was designed for speed and integrity, not manipulation, and this motion made that clear. What’s really happening here is simple: the same structure that obstructed arbitration is now trying to rewrite federal procedure to avoid discovery.