Would it surprise anyone to know that ASD has never even been a party to any lawsuits with Richard Weiss and SST?
As many within the golf industry know, Richard Weiss and I have been involved in litigation in a handful of jurisdictions over the course of the last 5 years. The last of this pending litigation has recently been resolved – however, not in the manner depicted in the Weiss / SST press release dated April 17, 2006. Throughout this litigation Mr. Weiss has never been able to convince a court of law that either I or my company, Advanced Shaft Dynamics, Ltd. ("ASD"), misappropriated any of his or SST’s trade secrets or other proprietary information or that I or ASD otherwise engaged in any unlawful activity with respect to him or SST. In legal parlance, these matters are "res judicata" or literally "the thing has been judged"– the legal effect of which is that Mr. Weiss has had his day in court and is legally barred from further legal action regarding these matters. I want to be perfectly clear that there is no order or court ruling preventing me, or ASD from using or commercializing ASD’s patent-pending technology.
Given Mr. Weiss’ ongoing lack of success in the court room, Mr. Weiss long ago resorted to actively engaging in what I would characterize as a smear campaign of me and ASD – the most recent example of which is the "press release" dated April 17, 2006, which many of you have seen. In addition to his recent press release, Mr. Weiss has continued to knowingly make both oral and written misrepresentations regarding findings of the court in the litigation, the ultimate outcome of the litigation, and the legality of my and ASD’s activities. He has done so for the sole purpose of slandering me as well as discouraging the industry from doing business with me and ASD. If Mr. Weiss’s statements are true, it begs the questions: Why hasn’t he prevailed in his legal claims? Why am I and ASD still doing business? Why haven’t I been found in contempt of court for my alleged violations of court orders?
The answer is simple. Weiss is not being truthful.
Although it has been my sincere hope Mr. Weiss would ultimately cease and desist from this unlawful interference and let the market determine which shaft orientation technology is superior, he nonetheless persists. Accordingly, I am now compelled to address a few of the misrepresentations and outright lies which have been made to the public over the last 5 years by Mr. Weiss regarding me and ASD. I hope those in the media who have published any information regarding these matters, or might care to, will elect to publish this communication in order to set the record straight.
Fortunately, litigation and the findings of the courts are a matter of public record and access to court records can be gained by any parties who possess a cause number and the county and state in which a case has been filed. For those of you who may have interest in accessing such records and finding out the truth for yourselves, I have provided (below) the information necessary for you to access these public records. I have also attached a copy of a court order from the Texas case concerning ASD’s and my ability to compete against Weiss and SST.
With the above said, I am providing the following case number, county, and state information so that any of you who may wish to can access court records on your own. I am also providing a brief description of what transpired in each case:
A. Cause No. 2001-10143
Styled: Philip Talamonti versus Richard Weiss and Strategic Shaft
Technologies, L.C.
In the District Court of Harris County Texas, 55th Judicial District
The result of the above case was that I was the prevailing party. The lawsuit was filed by me, initially for monies owed me personally by Dick and SST – which Dick withheld from me for roughly 4 years. The very morning of trial while seated before the judge in court and with the trial set to begin, the case was miraculously settled. I am unable to relate the terms of the settlement. The mention in Dick’s recent press release about the jury siding heavily with Weiss? The only thing that even came before a Texas jury was the matter of attorney’s fees that could be recovered in the case by me – and me alone – as the prevailing party. Does all this sound like Dick was the victor in the Texas case?
The Texas case had become a war of claims and counterclaims on both sides. While the suit was filed by me over a monetary dispute between Dick and I resulting from my service as consultant and president at SST, the case became a wide-ranging battle on many fronts, but more than anything was turned by Dick into a tool to attempt to restrict competition and a battle for me to retain my lawful right to conduct business.
The bottom line, as you may see from obtaining the court records, and viewing the attached court order, is that it was ordered by the court that both ASD and me are free to compete against Weiss and SST. The lone exception involving a handful of SST licensee’s. These were licensee’s that I either signed on while I was at SST, or in a couple of other instances, those who had become licensees before or during my time at SST. (The court was made to believe that as president of SST, I could have knowledge about SST’s pricing to these licensee’s that might allow me to offer shaft analysis services to them at prices that could undercut SST’s prices.) The court also ruled however, that ASD could conduct business with any of this handful of licensee’s if they discontinue their relationship with Dick and SST.
This is the most important point to understand…. ASD is free to conduct business and compete against Weiss and SST. That has been determined by the courts once and for all. This fact remains despite Dick’s letters, statements, threats, and misleading press releases. You see, it’s all about Dick trying to prevent competition and scare people away from doing business with ASD because we can effectively compete against SST. He has been trying to slow ASD down in the market and he has done a good job of that so far. With the decision by Loomis Golf to utilize ASD’s technology, and our current conversations with others in the industry who may also adopt ASD’s technology, Weiss is again revving up the propaganda machine.
As I have been saying, ASD’s technology is highly effective, fast, and our findings are repeatable. Let me restate a key word there, "repeatable". As I have heard, and as some may have already discovered, the same shaft inserted into a certain competitor’s shaft analysis equipment may produce differing results than previously found on the same shaft by the same equipment. Ditto for a third test on the same shaft, a fourth test, a fifth test, and so on. If you cannot place a given shaft back into the same piece of analysis equipment a second, third, or fourth time, and produce the same orientation findings on that shaft…what have you actually found? Are the results of any such analysis valid or in any way correct, useful, or valuable?
B. Cause No. 00-04788 CA 30
Styled: Richard Weiss versus Frank D’Aguanno, Philip F. Talamonti and
D&T Golf Ventures, a Pennsylvania joint venture
In the Circuit Court of the 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County,
Florida
This was a case between Dick and an inventor named Frank D’Aguanno, which I later became unfortunately involved in due to incomplete representations and material nondisclosures by Mr. D’Aguanno. Before going further, it is important to understand that Mr. D’Aguanno, and the inventions of D’Aguanno, have nothing whatsoever to do with ASD’s equipment, technology, or the Peak Performance Locating process. ASD in fact, has its own intellectual property, which I developed in conjunction with a highly respected and competent law firm, specializing in intellectual property matters, and with full knowledge of and avoidance of the other methods that existed, including both SST’s and D’Aguanno’s methods. I’ve long stated my belief that ASD’s technology is better than SST’s. How can ASD’s technology be better if the two technologies are the same?
I was pulled into the Florida case long after my involvement with SST and well after I started ASD. The nightmare began when I was contacted by Mr. D’Aguanno, who asked me to form a business venture with him to commercialize certain of his inventions, one of these was a steel shaft straightening device. Mr. D’Aguanno told me that his inventions were solely his and that he had no agreements with any other parties. I was not informed that D’Aguanno had in fact signed a prior agreement with Weiss pertaining to some of the D’Aguanno equipment.
Despite what appeared in Dick’s recent press release, neither I (Talamonti), or "my company" (which people likely construed as meaning ASD ), were prevailed against by Weiss in Florida. What is instead true is that I obtained judgments in both Florida cases that Dick filed against me, (a dismissal and summary judgment in the Circuit Court, and a summary judgment, which was affirmed on appeal, on all counts in a County Court case).
Talamonti and D&T obtained a Judgment on November 9, 2005, which specifically stated that "Talamonti and D&T Ventures shall go hence without day and Weiss shall not recover anything from Talamonti and D&T". The Court granted D&T and Talamonti’s Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Summary Judgment ruling in favor of Talamonti and D&T and against Weiss. Yet, Dick claimed victory in his recently press release. How does that reconcile with the truth? While Dick obtained a judgment against Mr. D’Aguanno in Florida, he obtained no judgments against me or D&T, and certainly not against ASD, which was never even a party in the case.
C. CASE NO. 03-15092 CC 05(08)
Styled: Richard Weiss versus Philip Talamonti and
Christine Talamonti
IN THE COUNTY COURT IN AND
FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL DIVISION
This was a non-intellectual property civil lawsuit that Dick brought against me and my wife of 25 years; the mother of my three children, After years of litigation in Texas which included Dick making claims against my wife, and where the court found no evidence against her, Weiss dropped those claims against us both shortly before trial. Dick then filed suit against my wife and I again under those same claims in another state. The Florida Court saw fit to throw out Dick’s claims against my wife and I on Summary Judgment. We later prevailed again on an appeal filed by Dick in the same case.
In his release, Weiss incorrectly states that this matter was dismissed solely because Weiss’ counsel missed a filing date. A review of the Court file, as well as the record on appeal, indicates otherwise. The lawsuit against me and my wife contained five counts against us. The first count was dismissed because Weiss and his lawyers missed the Statute of Limitations. However, the remaining four counts were dismissed, on Summary Judgment, because Weiss had absolutely no proof to support his meritless claims. The Appellate Court affirmed the granting of Summary Judgment on all counts, not just the missed filing date.
After prevailing against Weiss on appeal, the case was remanded to the trial court. On February 13, 2006, the Court sanctioned Weiss and his lawyers for frivolous litigation under Florida Statute 57.105 and ruled that the Talamonti’s were entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs from Weiss.
In order to avoid the time and expense of litigation and threats of appeal of the Circuit Court summary judgment ruling in my favor and County Court attorneys’ fees award in my favor, a settlement was reached. Despite the fact that Weiss was the plaintiff and seeking damages from D&T, my wife and me in both lawsuits, Weiss paid us a five figure sum to resolve all the lawsuits. It is usually the defendant, not the plaintiff, who pays money to settle cases. I agreed to transfer share of D&T’s interests in an old patent. I decided to let Dick have the D’Aguanno invention, its associated patent, and a related patent application of D’Aguanno’s that had been assigned to D&T. I reasoned that I was no longer conducting business with D’Aguanno, and what’s more, ASD has separate, unrelated intellectual property of its own. Therefore, I had no need to retain what once belonged to D’Aguanno and I agreed to assign it to Weiss.
The Weiss press release incorrectly states that a recent Court order prohibits Talamonti from using any equipment from the D&T Ventures as well as any improvements, modifications or continuations worldwide thereof. Please be advised that there is absolutely no Court Order which prohibits Talamonti from using any equipment from the D&T Ventures as well as any improvements, modifications or continuations worldwide thereof. I have no need or cause to use such equipment at this time, but I want to correct that further inaccuracy. There was absolutely no proof that Talamonti or D&T ever used the patent after it was assigned to Weiss by D’Aguanno.
In Conclusion:
I waited uncomfortably for a couple of days before responding to Weiss and SST’s press release. While I hesitated to do so, a response was necessary because my company is being attacked, as are my wife and I. At some point you just have to say "enough" and let people know what’s really going on. I hope I have done that here.
Since I cannot know how many people received the April 17, 2006 press release from Dick and SST, in the interest of setting the record straight, I would ask that any of you receiving this letter forward it on to others within your own company, or to others you may know in the industry.
Lastly, if any of you have received verbal or written cautions or outright threats from Dick or SST about doing business with me and ASD, or have been told that I am dishonest or disloyal, I would appreciate being made aware of it right away. Certain letters from Dick and SST have come to my attention, which even go as far as to say that I "violated my duties of loyalty and confidentiality to SST". The Texas case shows such statements to be untrue. Particularly given his knowledge to the contrary, Weiss and SST’s remarks amount to slander and can only be intended to impugn my reputation in the industry and to cause others to be concerned about whether I can be trusted personally and in business. Any assistance in understanding just how many of these seeds have been planted by Dick and SST, how deep those roots run, and whether it has in any way prevented or frightened you or your company away from doing business with me and ASD would be greatly appreciated.
Closing here with my thanks for your attention.
Contact:
Philip Talamonti
Advanced Shaft Dynamics, Ltd.
Tel: 936.443.8172
advancedshaft.com
