Koch Vs Royal Wine Merchant - Daniel Oliveros & Jeff Sokolin

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 1 of 48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COTJRT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLOzuDA
CASE NO:
WILIAM I. KOCH,
an individual,
Plaintiff,
vs.
ROYAL WINE MERCHANTS, LTD., aNew York corporation; DANIEL OLIVEROS, an individual; and JEFF SOKOLIN, an individual,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT Plaintiff William I. Koch ("Koch" or "Plaintiff'), on personal knowledge

as to himself,
and on information and belief as to defendants Royal Wine Merchants, Ltd. ("Royal"), Daniel
Oliveros ("Oliveros"), and Jeff Sokolin ("Sokolin") (collectively, "Defendants") as and for his
Complaint alleges:
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1.
Rare bottles of wine command prices in the thousands of dollars, creating strong
incentives to counterfeit them. This has drawn sophisticated wine counterfeiters to the rare wine
market. For years, these counterfeiters have duped wine collectors worldwide into
millions of dollars for near worthless bottles of wine.
paying
2.
Wine counterfeiters employ a variety of techniques. One technique is to obtain an
authentic empty wine bottle,
fill it
with inauthentic wine, affix a counterfeit label that
misrepresents the nature, vintage, and age of the wine inside, and seal
it with
an old cork. A
counterfeit bottle of high quality can often fool even meticulous collectors. It is not uncommon
Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTRsoN, p.n. . 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 2 of 48

for wine to go bad from legitimate causes such as poor storage conditions. Therefore, if a bottle
does not taste right, collectors often view
it
simply as bad luck. Not until Plaintiffs recent
investigation has the problem of Royal's counterfeit wine become known to Plaintiff.
3.
'
Royal, Oliveros, and Sokolin have been instrumental in importing, promoting, and
selling counterfeit rare wine to the American market. Koch's investigation has recently revealed
that from at least 1998
to
2008, Defendants knowingly purchased hundreds
of
bottles of
counterfeit wine and injected them into the marketplace.
If
real, the hundreds of counterfeit
bottles Defendants injected into the marketplace would have been worth more than eight million
dollars.
4.
Defendant Royal Wine Merchants is a corporation organized in New York Stte
that operates a retail wine store in New York
City. At
least as recently as May 201I, Royal's
website claimed it had "been drinking and selling the great wines of the world for twenty years,"
and that its cellar was "filled with the greatest producers on
(http://www.royalwinemerchants.com/index2.htm, last checked May 17,20rr).
earth."
5.
Defendants Oliveros and Sokolin are, and have been at all times relevant to this
Complaint, the principals of Royal. The New York Department of State website indicates that Sokolin is the Principal Executive Officer and Chief Executive Offrcer of Royal. Koch alleges on information and belief that Oliveros is or has otherwise held himself out to be a principal of
Royal. Furthermore, Oliveros is and has been at all times relevant to this Complaint the chief
sales manager
of Royal. On information and belief, at aIl times relevant to this Complaint,
Defendants Oliveros and Sokolin were each and both responsible

operations.
for Royal's day to
day
-2STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTRsoN, p... Museum Tower ' I50 west Flogler street . suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 - 3os-7g-3200
6.
In the fine wine community,
Defendants Sokolin and Oliveros are and were
known as the "sexy boys." They often described the wines they sold as "sexy juice." Defendants Sokolin and Oliveros lived a lavish lifestyle, staying at ltxury hotels and throwing extravagant
parties. They had a reputation for acquiring, promoting, and selling extremely rare and valuable
vintages of fine wine. As described in the online magazine Slate:
what really set the sexy boys apart was their seemingly limitless stock of legendary old wines, many of them in supersize bottlesquantities and formats that no one else could get their hands on. They bombarded clients with faxes touting their latest finds: multiple bottles of 196l Latour Pomerol ("Kinky Juice!,'), magnums of 1945 Mouton Rothschild ("our latest sexy purche"), a double magnum of 1949 Cheval Blanc ("Perfect condition. Better than l947lll Trust me!!!"). It seemed too good to be true. Apparently, it was.
Mike
:
Steinberger, what's
in the Bottle?, SLnre, June 14,2010,
available
at
http / / www . slate.c oml idl 22 5 67 7 5 .
7.
In the
1990s, Defendants Sokolin and Oliveros met and befriended Hardy
Rodenstock, a well-known German wine counterfeiter who has for decades been involved in the tasting and promotion of rare vintages of wine. Since the mid 1980s, Rodenstock has created, or
directed others
to create,
numerous bottles
of
counterfeit wine that he claims
to
have
"discovered" in exotic locations or to have acquired from persons he will not reveal. Since 1998, Rodenstock has introduced well over two thousand bottles
of counterfeit rare wine into the
United Sttes market.
8.
Records of a wine importing, distributing, and brokering company located in New
York and of a third parfy custom broker and freight forwarder located in New Jersey
(collectively, "import records"), reveal that from at least 1998 to 2008, Defendants served
as the
primary importer of Rodenstock's counterfeit wine to the United States. The import records
reveal that virtually all the wine Defendants imported from Rodenstock purported to come from
-3
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON. P.N. .l50 Museum Tower west Flogler Streer . suite 2200 - Miomi, FL 33130 - 3os-7g-3200

the finest French chteaux, to date from the most prized vintages, and to be bottled in the rarest
sized bottles.
It tums out the wines
were too fine, too prized, and too rare to be genuine.
Representatives of some of the chteaux have revealed to Koch that certain vintages and bottlesizes Defendants imported were likely never produced at all, and others were never produced in the volume Defendants imported them. Still others were produced in the volume that Defendants
imported, but not in sufficient quantities to make it realistic for Defendants to have imported the volume they imported.
9.
Defendants at all times relevant to this Complaint knew that the wine Rodenstock
delivered to them was counterfeit or likely counterfeit. Nevertheless, on information and belief, after a reasonable opportunity
for further investigation or discovery, Koch will likely have
evidentiary support to establish that Defendants entered into an agreement with Rodenstockwhether tacit
or implicit-to import,
promote, and sell his counterfeit wine as genuine.
Defendants then carried out their agreement for more than ten years, from at least 1998 to at least
2008. During this period, Defendants imported and sold Rodenstock's wine into the American
markelace, turning a handsome profit, and injuring many unsuspecting victims, including
Koch.
10.
Koch has recently discovered that he purchased at least 32 bottles that Defendants
imported and sold into the United States markelace. Koch purchased the 32 bottles from
Defendants indirectly and through multiple transactions. Despite knowing that each bottle was
counterfeit or probably counterfeit at the time they imported and sold it, Defendants represented
that each of the 32 bottles was genuine.
11. The 32 bottles Koch purchased, because they are counterfeit, ffe
worth
substantially less than Koch paid for them. Koch would not have purchased them if he knew or
=4STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &- SITTERSON. p.n. Museum Tower . I 50 West Flogler Street . Sute 2200 . Miomi, FL 331 30 . 305-789-3200

suspected them to be counterfeit. Koch has suffered damages in an amount to be determined at
trial, but no less than $547,693, the amount Koch paid for the 32 counterfeit bottles. Koch
brings this suit against Defendants in order to be made whole, to demonstrate the culpability of
Defendants, and to enjoin Defendants from continuing to sell counterfeit wine to an unsuspecting
public.
PARTIES
12. 13. 1415.
PlaintiffWilliam I. Koch is aresident andctizenof the State of Florida.

Defendant Royal Wine Merchants, Ltd., is a corporation organized under the laws
of New York with its principal place of business in New York, New york. Defendant Daniel Oliveros is native of Venezuela and
a citizen of the
Stte
of
New York residing in New York, New York. Defendant Jeff Sokolin
is a citizen of the State of New
Jersey residing in
Cresskill, New Jersey.
JT]RISDICTION AND VENUE
16.
law
and. state
Jurisdiction over the claims arising under 18 U.S.C. 1962 is proper in this Court
pursuantto 18U.S.C. $ 1964 and28 U.S.C. $1331. Supplementaljurisdictionoverthecommon law claims alleged herein is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. $1367. This Court also
has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. $ 1332 as the matter is between citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
17.
citizen
Venue and personal jurisdiction are proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. $ 1391
and 18 U.S.C. $ 1965(a) and
(b). Koch is and has at all times relevant to this complaint
been a
of Florid4 residing in the Southern District of Florida.
Defendants have committed
tortious acts against Plaintiffwithin this District, and a substantial part of the events or omissions
-5STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTTRsoN. p.n. Museum Tower 150 west Flogler street . suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 - 3os-7\g-3200
giving rise to Plaintiffs claims occurred in this District. The bottles of counterfeit wine
Defendants indirectly and tortiously sold to Plaintiff are kept and stored within this District. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. $ 1965(b), the ends ofjustice require that all Defendants be brought before this Court.
FACTUAL ALLEGATTONS
I.
Defendants Reach an lllicit Agreement with Hardy Rodenstock A Notorious Counterf'eiter of Rare Wne.
18.
In the mid to late 1990s, Defendants reached an illicit agreement-whether tacit
or implicit-with Rodenstock. The agreement was that Defendants would promote and find
buyers for certain rare vintages Defendants counterfeits
of
expensive Bordeaux. Rodenstock would then export to
of that vintage of expensive Bordearx.
The agreement offered
advantages to each party. For Defendants, the agreement earned them significant profit on each
counterfeit bottle they sold, and earned them renown for their exclusive access to rare wines.
Sokolir as the o\ryner of Royal, earned significant sums from such sales. Oliveros also earned
significant sums. Though nominally a salesperson, Oliveros earned a "generous" commission,
based in part on the company's overall sales.
19.
For Rodenstoclq the agreement perpetuated his long term wine fraud. Rodenstock
has had a long and illustrious career creating,promoting, and selling counterfeit
wine.
Since the
mid
1980s, he has promoted and sold many exotic, rare wines that he claimed
to
have
"discovered" under anazing circumstances. The wines often came from people or locations that Rodenstock refused to identifu. The details he did provide were often incredible; he claimed to
have acquired wines from a bricked-up cellar in Paris, from secret caches in Venezuel4 and from
hidden imperial cellars in Russia. Selling these rare bottles earned Rodenstock fortune and fame in the rare wine community.
All or nearly all of the bottles
were counterfeit.
-6STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITIRsoN. p.n. Museum Tower . 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
20.
Rodenstock's long-term scheme duped numerous collectors, including Koch.
Koch purchased wines from Rodenstock, which \rere purported to have once belonged to
President Thomas Jefferson. Only in the mid-2000s, when a museum planned
to exhibit a
photograph of some of these bottles, did Koch first learn that any of the bottles were probably
counterfeit. Thereafter, Koch's investigation exposed overwhelming evidence the wines were
counterfeit. Rodenstock had claimed the wines dated to the 18 Century. Experts determined
that the bottles were engraved with electric tools. German witnesses admitted that they had
engraved wine bottles for Rodenstock. Another German witness admitted he had counterfeited
wine labels for Rodenstock. Koch initiated legal action against Rodenstock in the Southern
District of New York, and obtained a default judgment on May 17,2010.
il.
Defendants Help Rodenstock Promote and Sell His Counterfeit Wine in the United
States.
21.
In order to succeed in his decades-long wine fraud, Rodenstock needed to create
demand for his counterfeit wine, and to sell his counterfeit wine without arousing unwanted
suspicion. Defendants helped him achieve both goals.
22.
Defendants became the primary conduit for Rodenstock's counterfeit wine to the
United States. For more than ten years-from at least 1998 to 2008-they imported the majority
of all Rodenstock wine imported to the United States.
23.
Defendants also promoted the wine aggressively. In addition to hosting tastings

as
on Rodenstock's behalf, the Defendants each undertook specific responsibilities. Oliveros,
Royal's chief salesperson, promoted and marketed Rodenstock wines, especially at Royal's retail storefront, and managed cerain of Royal's client relationships through that storefront. Sokolin,
as Royal's owner and CEO, managed its higher end client relationships and promoted
Rodenstock wine at a wider range of locations, including tastings and conventions.
-7
Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF
. 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 .
&
SITTERSoN,
p.n.
Miom, FL
33I30 . 305-289-3200

24.
But from at least the mid 1990s, the "heart and soul" of Defendants' business, and
the heart and soul of their efforts to promote Rodenstock wine, was the blitz of near-nightly
faxes that Oliveros and Sokolin sent their clientele. These faxes-typically handwritten
personally by either Sokolin or Oliveros-touted and promoted Rodenstock counterfeit wines.
The faxes included a description of the Rodenstock wine, background information on its
producer, and laudatory comments regarding its Defendants largely replaced these faxes
quality. In the latter part of the 2000s,

same
with emails, but the emails included the
representations. Specifically, these faxes and emails represented (a) the vintage in which each offered wine was purportedly produced, and (b) the producer who purportedly produced
reNons set
it.
For
forth more fully below, Defendants knew at the time they distributed these faxes and
emails that such representations contained
or
probably contained
at
least two material
falsehoods. Defendants knew that the Rodenstock wines they imported and promoted were (a) not produced in the vintage, and (b) not produced by the producer represented in the faxes and
emails.
ilI.
Defendants Import Nearly Eisht Million Dollars'Worth of Rodenstock's Counterfeit Wine to the United States, and Are the Primary Importer of Rodenstock's Wine.
25.
Import records show that, between 1998 and 2008, Defendants imported to the
United States at least 2,067 bottles from Rodenstock, including at least 1,974 bottles between 2002 and 2007 alone.
If
genuine, the 2,067 total bottles Rodenstock delivered to Defendants
would have been worth more than eight million dollars. The2,067 bottles Rodenstock delivered
to
Defendants purported
to be of the finest French Chteaux.
These included the famed
Bordeaux Chteau
of Cheval Blanc; d'Yquem, Laffie, Lafleur, Latour, L'Eglise, L'Evangile,
Margaux, Mouton, and Ptrus. The 2,067 bottles also tended to come from the most renowned
vintages. Such vintages included 192I,1947, and 196I, which are generally regarded as among
-8STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTRSOI.I. p.n. Museum Tower . 150 West Flogler Streef . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33'l 30 . 305-789-3200

the greatest Bordeaux vintages of the 20 Century. The 2,067 bottles also tended to be bottled in the largest, rarest, and most valuable formats.
26.
A standard sized wine bottle holds 750 milliliters, but wine is sometimes bottled
in larger formats, including magnums (1,500 ml or two standard bottles), Marie Jeannes Q,250
ml or three standard bottles), double magnums (3,000 ml or four standard bottles), jeroboams
(4,500 ml or six standard bottles), and impriales (6,000 ml or eight standard bottles). Large format bottles fetch higher prices at auction than do standard sized bottles, because large bottles
are arer and wine ages more slowly in them. As a result,large format bottles are ideal for
counterfeiting. Standard sized bottles, being standard, are produced by Chteaux in much greater quantities than are bottles of any other size. Improbably, just a small fraction of the bottles
Defendants imported from Rodenstock were standard sized bottles. The vast majority were large
for-mat bottles ideal for counterfeiting, including many magnums, double magnums, jeroboams, and even impriales.
27.
The following shipments are representative of those that Defendants received
from Rodenstock:
On November 23, 1999, Defendants imported from Rodenstock at least

magnrlms
three
of
1961 Chteau Ptrus, two magnums
of
1921 Chteau Ptrus, and one
bottle of 1811 Chteau Laftte.
On Novemb er 25, lgg9, Defendants imported from Rodenstock at least two more
magnums of Chteau Ptrus, one each of the
l92l ard 1947 vintages.
On November 27, 1999, Defendants imported from Rodenstock more magnums of

Chteau Ptrus: a double magnum of the 1947 vintage and two magnums of the 1921 vintage.
-9
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WISSrR ALHADEFF &. SITTRso,I, p.n. Museum Tower . 1 50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
In the span of just over two months, between October 14,2003 and December
19,
2003, Defendants imported from Rodenstock at least nine magnums of 1961 Chteau
Ptrus.
On July 26,2004, Defendants imported from Rodenstock at least six magnums of

1961 Chteau Ptrus. On December 6, 2004, Defendants imported from Rodenstock at least three magnums
of l92I
Chteau Ptrus.
On February 1I,2006, Defendants imported from Rodenstock at least six magnums
of
1947 Chteau Cheval Blanc.
On November 17, 2008, the most recent date for which Koch has access to import
records, Defendants imported from Rodenstock, via Lufthansa, an impriale
Chteau Ptrus.
of
1961
28. If genuine, the market value of the 2,067 bottles Defendants imported from
Rodenstock amounted to well over eight million dollars.
If
Defendants turned even a modest
profit on such gross revenue, their profits were significant.
29.
Trading,
Other entities also imported Rodenstock's wine to the United States, but in smaller
proportions. Such entities include Bordeaux Wine Locators; Farr Vintners, Ltd.; and JEB Wine
Ltd. Records indicate that, including the 2,067 bottles delivered to Defendants
'constituted the substantial majority of the bottles that Rodenstock delivered to the United States between 1998 and 2008. Thus, during that period at least, Defendants were the biggest conduit
for Rodenstock wine into the United Stales.
30.
In importing each of the 2,067 bottles from Rodenstock, Defendants
represented
in a bill of lading, invoice, and/or official United States customs documents (a) the vintage in
- 10STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTRsoN, p.n. Museum Tower . 150 West Flogler Streef . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
which each wine was purportedly produced, and (b) the producer who purportedly produced it.
For reasons set forth more fully below, Defendants knew, at the time they drafted and submitted
these bills
of lading, invoices,
and/or official United States customs documents, that their
representations
in those
documents contained or probably contained at least two material
falsehoods. Defendants knew that the Rodenstock wines they imported were (a) not produced in
the vintage, and (b) not produced by the producer represented in these documents.
IV.
I)efendants Conceal Rodenstock's ldentity. And Defendants' Relationship with Rodenstock from Buyers
31.
Aware that Rodenstock was a notorious counterfeiter, Defendants sought to
conceal the nature Gelsman, owner
of their relationship and arrangement with him. For instance,
Edward
of a wine store in Northern California, recalls
discussing Rodenstock with
Oliveros, sometime in the mid 2000s. Gelsman asked Oliveros if a wine shipment to Defendants bearing tape with "West German" notation was from Rodenstock. Oliveros, in an effort to
conceal his relationship with Rodenstock, refused to identiff the source of the wine. Gelsman also recalls discussing Rodenstock \rrith Sokolin around the same time. Gelsman asked Sokolin
if a wine shipment to Defendants bearing
tape with "Vy'est German" notation was from
Rodenstock. Sokolir just like Oliveros, refused to identi$ the source of the wine. Based on information currently available and described below, it appears that Rodenstock was likely the
source of the wine shipment Gelsman questioned.
32. In
carrying out their
illicit
agreement, Defendants Oliveros and Sokolin
communicated with Rodenstock regularly by fax. By fax, Sokolin indicated those rare wines for
which Defendants had located a buyer. Such buyers included both individuals and auction houses. For reasons that likely included Rodenstock's notoriety
rs
a counterfeiter and the
tl-
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSOI.I, P.N. Museum Tower . I50 West Flogler Street . Suile 2200 . Miom, FL 33 30 , 305-789-3200

improbable volume of his imports, neither Rodenstock nor Defendants.revealed to buyers that
Rodenstock was the source of the wine.
V.
Defendants Know That Most Are Counterfeit.
If Not All the Bottles
They Import from Rodenstock
33.
Koch's investigation has revealed that certain vintages
in
certain formats-
including many of those that Defendants imported from Rodenstock-are and were almost
always counterfeit.
34.
For instance, between 1998 and 2008, Defendants imported from Rodenstock
eighteen magnums
of 1947 Chteau Lafleur. An owner of
Chteau Lafleur has stated that, in
1947, the chateau bottled
just f,rve magnums. Therefore, at least thirteen of the eighteen
magnums Defendants imported had to be counterfeit. But
it is unlikely, to put it mildt that of 1947 Chteau Lafleur. This
Defendants managed to obtain all five of the genuine magnums
feat would have required, among other things, that no one had ever consumed one. It is much
more likely that all eighteen, or nearly all eighteen, of the magnums Defendants imported were
counterfeit. From the improbable import volume alone, Defendants knew that these magnums
were counterfeit. Even magnums
if
Defendants were not aware that Chateau Lafleur produced just five
in 1947, they were aware that magnums of Chateau Lafleur----of
any vintage-are
exceptionally rare. From their experience in the wine indusby, Defendants knew that eighteen
magnums
of a single vintage from a single source was beyond improbable. Furthermore, this
fact alerted Defendants-if they did not already know-that Rodenstock's other bottles were
counterfeit or probably counterfeit. Defendants imported and sold the wine anyway.
35.
Between 1998 and 2008, Defendants imported from Rodenstock 44 magnums and
two double magnums of Chteau Ptrus from vintages of 1945 or earlier. Large format bottles
Ptrus from vintages
of
of 1945 and earlier ur" lik"ly counterfeit. As part of Koch's investigation,
-t2STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTE RsoN, p.e. .l50 Museum Tower . West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 | 305-789-3200

Koch's representative brought magnums that purported to be
I92l
Chteau Ptrus to Jean Claude
Berrouet and Francois Veyssiere. Berrouet is a renowned winemaker of Chteau ptrus and the
former technical diiector of tablissements Jean-Pierre Moueix, which owns Chteau ptrus.
Veyssiere is the cellar-master of Chteau Ptrus. Until that time, neither Berrouet nor Veyssiere
had ever heard of a Chteau Ptrus magnum from 1921. Neither Berrouet nor Veyssiere believes
that Chteau Ptrus bottled any magnums from earlier than 1945. Likely all 46large format
bottles
of
Chteau Ptrus from 1945 and earlier that Defendants imported were counterfeit.
Furthermore, that Rodenstock delivered such a large volume of exceptionally rare bottles alerted Defendants
-if
they did not already know-that Rodenstock's other bottles were counterfeit or
probably counterfeit. Defendants imported and sold the wine anyway.
36.
Koch has discovered additional evidence suggesting that Rodenstock's large
format Chteau Ptrus is counterfeit. A confidential witness ("CV/") lived in the same area of
Germany as Rodenstock during the 1980s, and was an employee of a print shop CW's family
owned. According to CW, Rodenstock employed him and his family-owned print shop to create
labels for bottles of wine from several different Chteaux and vintages, including labels of
Chteau Ptrus from 1921, 1928, and 1929. On several occasions in the 1980s, Rodenstock
brought old wine labels into the family-owned print shop and asked CW to make copies of the
labels on old paper. Shown photographs of various wine bottles, CW identified his own
handiwork on labels of purported 1921, 1928, and 1929 Chteau Ptrus. Each of the Chteau
Ptrus labels CW identified as his own handiwork is on a bottle that came from Rodenstock.
37.
Between 1998 and 2008, Defendants imported from Rodenstock 47 magnums,
two Marie Jeannes, one double magnum, two jeroboams, and one impriale Blanc. CW has stated that Rodenstock hired him to
create copies
of 1947 Cheval
of 1947 Cheval Blanc labels.
-13STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTE RsoN, n. Museum Tower ' I50 west Flogler street . suile 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 - 3os-lg-3200
Likely all or nearly all the large format bottles of 1947 Chteau Cheval Blanc that Defendants
imported were counterfeit.
38.
magnums
Between 1998 and 2008, Defendants imported from Rodenstock at least fifteen
1947 Chteau L'Eglise
of
Clinet. Magnums of 1947 Chteau L'Eglise Clinet are
exceptionally rare. To have discovered at least 15 is incredible, suggesting that Defendants knowingly imported counterfeit wine.
39.
Between 1998 and 2008, Defendants imported from Rodenstock 30 bottles, 80
magnums, and three jeroboams of purported 1945 Mouton-Rothschild. On each bottle
of
1945
Mouton-Rothschild, the label states that the Chteau produced 1,475 magnums and. just 24
jeroboams of the 1945 vintage. Defendants therefore-during a ten year period-purportedly imported nearly six percent of the magnums and nearly thirteen percent of the jeroboams ever
produced. For one wine shop to be the source of such a Iarge amount of rare vintage is highly
unlikely. The volume
suggests that most
if not all of the bottles of
7945 Mouton-Rothschild that
Defendants imported are counterfeit. Defendants knew they were importing an improbable percentage
of the large format
1945 Mouton-Rothschild ever produced. The information
necessary to determine this was literally printed on each bottle. Defendants imported and sold the wine anyway.
40.
Individual collectors of rare and fine wine often do not consume their wine, but
rather store, trade, and resell
it.
Individual collectors rarely detect counterfeits, because they
generally accept each bottle of wine to be what it purports to be, they usually do not taste or open
the wine, and they have little incentive to discover counterfeits. Once a bottle is determined to
be counterfeit it is next to worthless. Furthermore, unlike retailers such as
Defendants,
individual collectors do not typically acquire a large volume of any particular rare wine. This
-14Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTRsoT.I. p.n. . 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200

makes
it difficult for collectors to compare different
bottles, purported to be of the same rare
chteau, vintage, and format, against one another. This also prevents collectors from
recognizing, as Defendants did, that certain wines could not exist in the large numbers in which they are sold, and that a large proportion of those sold are necessarily counterfeit. For all these
reasons, a counterfeit bottle may resurface and be resold in the marketplace multiple times.
41.
Of the 2,067 bottles that Defendants imported, only a small fraction have been
identified, located, and removed from the marketplace. Most of the bottles Defendants imported continue to circulate and to dupe collectors, investors, and consumers. Until all Defendants'
imports have been identified, located, and removed from the marketplace, victims will
proliferate. Thus, Defendants' fraud is ongoing.
VI.
Koch Discovers Counterfeit Wines In Hs Cellar Purchased from Defendants.
42. In 2007, Koch retained

assess whether any
an expert to examine bottles he had purchased and to
of them were counterfeit. During that inquiry, the expert was stunned to find
in Koch's cellar at least two of the bottles that the expert had inspected in another collector's
cellar in2002. The expert could be sure that these bottles came from the other collector's cellar
because they
still bore stickers that the expert had placed on the bottles in2002. The two bottles
with the Expert's Stickers, numbered
4l
and
42, each purported to be Chteau Latour 1928, and,
if authentic, would have a market value of more than $2,000 each. One of these bottles (number
41) was counterfeit and one (number 42) was genuine. The other collector had purchased each
of these bottles from Defendants.
VII.
Auction Houses Acker, Christie's. Sotheby's, and Zachvs Dominate'Wine Auction

Sales.
43.
Most of the fine, rare, and collectable wine that was auctioned between 1998 and
2008 was auctioned by one
of four major auction houses: Acker, Christie's, Sotheby's,

_15_
and
Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTE RsoN, p... . 150 West Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 16 of 48 Zachys. At all times relevant to this Complaint and especially between 1998 and 2008, four
auction houses-Acker, Christie's, Sotheby's, and Zachys-dominated United States and

worldwide wine auction sales. Combined, the four houses were responsible for most of the rare wine auctioned during this period. During this period, relatively few bottles were auctioned by
other auction houses. This means that most rare, f,rne, and collectable wine in circulation in the
United States during this period passed through one of these auction houses.
44.
In 2004, these four auction houses led the United States market and worldwide
market in wine auction sales. Peter D. Meltze Worldwide Wine Auctions Pass the 810}-Million
Mark, WrNe SpectatoR,
Jan.
4,2005. In2004, the $70.3 million worth of wine that these four
of the total
houses combined to auction in the United States alone in2004 constituted nearly 65Yo
wine auctioned worldwide, and a much larger percentage of the total wine auctioned in the
United States. .Id. In 2005, Zachys,Acker, and Sotheby's led domestic auction sales; Christie's,
Zachys, and Sotheby's led worldwide auction sales; and all four houses combined to account for
more than 75Yo of total worldwide auction sales. Peter D. Meltzer, 2005 Wine Auctions Exceed
8166 Millioz, WnrE SpcreroR, Dec. 22,2005. In2006, the four houses led both United Sttes
and worldwide auction sales, combining to account for nearly 80Yo of total worldwide auction
sales. Peter D. Meltzer, 2006 Wine Auctons Break the 8200 Mllion Mark, Wrqe SPectAtoR,
Dec.21,2006. In2007, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's led United
States auction sales; and the
four led worldwide auction sales, combining to account for more than 77%o of total worldwide
auction sales. Peter D. Meltzer, Global Wine Auctions Break the 8300 Million Mark in 2007,
Wrlre Specr.roR, Dec. 19,2007. ln 2008, Acker andZachys led United States auction sales;
rnd
the four lead worldwide auction sales, combining to account for more thn 73%o of total
worldwide auction sales. Peter D. Meltzer, Global Wine Auctions Decline by 825 Million in
-t6STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &- SITTERSON, p... Museum Tower . i 50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33 30 ' 305-289-3200

2008, Wr{s SpBcreroR, Dec. 29,2008. The four houses dominated auction sales in years prior
to 2004 as well. A fifth major United
States auction house, Hart Davis Hart, has recently
loosened the four houses' stranglehold on the United States market. But Hart Davis Hart has
gro\iln rapidly in the past three years and did not conduct its first auction until 2005. Id.;Peter D. Meltzer,
In Chcago,
There's a New Auction House on the Block, V/rNe SpecreroR, Oct. 21,
2004; Peter D. MeItzer, Hart Davis Hart's Inaugural Auction Brings in 82 Million, WrNp SpecreroR, Feb.
2,2005.
Therefore, most of the f,rne, rare, and collectable wine that was
auctioned between 1998 and 2008 was auctioned by one of these four auction houses.
VUI.
Koch Discovers That 32 Counterfeit Wines In His Cellar Were Probably Imported and Sold into the United States Marketplace bv Defendants.
45.
Tracing the ownership of an individual bottle of wine is often challenging. Many
perceive bottles of wine to be fungible. Even owners who track bottles by Chteau and vintage
may fait to track individual bottles. Furthermore, auction houses and wine retailers often view
the sources of their wines as proprietary information they are unwilling to divulge. This
challenge of tracing individual bottles has only exacerbated the problem of wine fraud.
46.
In spite of this challenge, Koch's investigation has determined that he has in his
cellar at least 32 counterfeit or probably counterfeit bottles of rare wine that were imported or were likely imported and sold into the United States market by Defendants. Koch purchased
each of the 32 counterfeit bottles on the reasonable and honest belief that the bottle was genuine.
Koch could not in the exercise of reasonable diligence have determined any of the 32 bottles was
counterfeit at any time before he was advised by an expert that the bottle bore indicia of fraud,
including evidence of counterfeiting such as unusual or inappropriate capsules, labels, and

bottles, and unusual or inappropriate bottle condition. While these indicia should have been and
were recogni zable to Defendants because, for example,
of their
self-advertised standing as
-t7
STEARNS WEAVER IVTILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON, P... Museum Tower . 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
experts in the wine indusbry, the indicia were not reasonably recognizable to Koch. Furthermore,
Koch could not in the exercise of reasonable diligence have determined that any of the 32 bottles
was imported and sold into the United States by Defendants at any time before he obtained
discovery of the third party import records.
47.
The 32 bottles that Koch purchased and which he has currently identified
as
having been imported and sold into the United States market by Defendants are:
A bottle of purported 1811 Chteau Lafite.
48.
Import records show that, between 1998 and 2008, Defendants imported from
Rodenstock a total of six bottles of purported I I I 1 Chteau Laftte. During the same period, just
four such bottles were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's, and at the
end of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned more bottles than
Defendants had already imported. Given the rarity of this vintage; the near match between the number of bottles Defendants imported and the number of bottles auctioned; and the relationship
between when the bottles were imported and when they were auctioned, Defendants likely
imported to the markelace the majority of bottles auctioned in the United States during this
time period as 1811 Chteau Lafite. Given that Defendants imported their bottles from
Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter, it is overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to
the marketplace the

period as I 8l
majority-if not all----of
the counterfeit bottles auctioned during this time

181
Chteau
Laftte. During this period, Koch purchased a bottle of purported
Chteau Lafite as
lot 380 at a Zachys' October 28, 2005 auction for $29,172.55.
Koch
subsequently discovered the bottle is counterfeit. Therefore,
it is highly likely
the bottle was
imported to the United States and injected into the markelace by Defendants.
A bottle of purported 1864 Chteau Latour.
-18STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTERSON, NN. Museum Tower . 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33i 30 ' 305-789-3200
49.
Rodenstock a totl of five bottles of purported 1864 Chteau Latour. During the same period,
just one was auctioned by Zachys, and the auction postdated Defendants'first import in
1998.
Christie's, Acker, and Sotheby's auctioned none. Given the rarity of this vintage and format, and the disproportion between the number of bottles Defendants imported and the number of bottles auctioned, Defendants likely imported to the markelace the one bottle auctioned in the United
States during this time period as 1864 Chteau Latour. Given that Defendants imported their
bottles from Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter, it is overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to the markelace any counterfeit bottle auctioned in the United States during this time
period as 1864 Chteau Latour. During this period, Koch purchased a bottle of purported 1864
Chteau Latour as
lot 40I
aZachys' October 28,2005 auction for $15,912. Koch subsequently
discovered the bottle is counterfeit. Therefore, it is highly likely the bottle was imported to the
United Sttes and iqiected into the marketplace by Defendants.
A bottle of purported 1865 Chteau Latou(.
50.
Rodenstock atotalof ten bottles of purported 1865 Chteau Latour. During the same period, six
such bottles were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's, and at the end
of
no quarter dwing that period had the four auction houses auctioned more bottles than Defendants
had already imported. Given the rarity of this vintage; the near match between the number of bottles Defendants imported and number of bottles auctioned; and the relationship between when
the bottles were imported and when they were auctioned, it is likely that Defendants imported to
the markelace all or nearly all of the bottles auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1865 Chteau Latour. Given that Defendants imported their bottles from Rodenstock,
_t9_
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &- SITTE RsoN. p.n. .l50 Museum Tower . West Flogler Streei . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
an infamous counterfeiter,
it is overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to the
marketplace all or nearly all of the counterfeit bottles auctioned during this time period as 1865 Chteau Latour. During this period, Koch purchased a bottle of purported 1865 Chteau Latour as
lot
402 aZachys' October 28,2005 auction for $15,912. Koch subsequently discovered the
bottle is counterfeit. Therefore, t is highly likely the bottle was imported to the United States
and injected into the markelace by Defendants.
A bottle of purported 1870 Chteau Lafite.
51.
Rodenstock a total of four bottles of purported 1870 Chteau
Lafite. During the same
period,
four such bottles were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's. Given the rarity of this vintage and format, and the exact match between the number of bottles Defendants
imported and the number of bottles auctioned, Defendants likely imported to the marketplace the majority of bottles auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1870 Chteau Lafite. Given that Defendants imported their bottles from Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter, it is
overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to the marketplace all or nearly all of the
counterfeit bottles auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1870 Chteau Lafite.
During this period, Koch purchased a bottle of purported 1870 Chteau Lafrte as lot 386 at
Zachys' October 28,2005 auction for $18,564. Koch subsequently discovered the bottle is
counterfeit. Therefore, it is highly likely the bottle was imported to the United States
injected into the marketplace by Defendants.
and
A masnum of purported 1870 Chteau Lafite.
52.
Rodenstock one magnum of purported 1870 Chteau Laftte in2003. That year, no such magnum
-20 STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTRSON, P.N. Museum Tower . 50 West Flogler Sfreet ' Suife 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33130 ' 305-789-3200
Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 21 of 48 was auctioned by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, or Sotheby's.
auctioned by Zachys
At
least one such magnum was

Defendants likely
in 2005. Given the rarity of this vintage and format,
imported to the marketplace the only magnum auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1870 Chteau Laftte. Given that Defendants imported the magnum from Rodenstock,
an infamous counterfeiter, it is overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to

marketplace all or nearly all
the
of the counterfeit
magnums auctioned during this time period as
1870 ChteauLaftte. During this period, Koch purchased a magnum of purported 1870 Chteau
Laftte as lot 389 a Zachys' October 28,2005 auction for $33,150. Koch subsequently discovered
the magnum is counterfeit. Therefore, it is highly likely the magnum was imported to the United
States and injected into the marketplace by Defendants.
Two magnums of purported 1921 Chteau Cheval Blanc.
53.
Rodenstock a total of eleven magnums of purported
l92l
Chteau Cheval Blanc. During the
same period, seven such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and
Sotheby's. Given the
rar of this vintage and format,
and the near match between the number
of bottles Defendants imported and the number of bottles auctioned, Defendants likely imported
to the marketplace the majority of magnums auctioned in the United States during this time
period as
l92l
Chteau Cheval
Blanc. Given that Defendants imported their magnums from
Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter, and that the owner of the Chteau Cheval Blanc doubts
the authenticity of Rodenstock's large format bottles of Cheval Blanc, it is overwhelmingly likely
that Defendants imported to the marketplace all or nearly all

auctioned during this time period as
purchased two magnums of purported
of
the counterfeit magnums
l92l
l92I
Chteau Cheval
Blanc. During this period, Koch
Chteau Cheval Blanc as lots 357 and 358 at Zachys'
-21 STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTRSOI'I. P... Museum Tower . 150 Wesf Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33'l30 ' 305-789-3200
October 28,2005 auction for $17,283.33 each. Koch subsequently discovered each magnum is
counterfeit. Therefore, it is highly likely the magnums were imported to the United States and
injected into the markelace by Defendants.
Two maenums of purpored 1921 Chteau Lafleur.
54.
purported
Import records show that Defendants imported from Rodenstock trwo magnums of
Chteau Lafleur, one
I92l
in 2003 andone in 2005. During the same period, only two
such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's. Given the runty of this vintage and format, and the exact match between the number of bottles Defendants
imported and the number of bottles auctioned, Defendants likely imported to the markelace
both or one of the bottles auctioned in the United States during this time period as
l92I
Chteau
Lafleur. Given that Defendants imported their
magnum from Rodenstock, an infamous
counterfeiter, it is likely the magnums Defendants imported to the markelace were counterfeit. During this period, Koch purchased two magnums of purported
I92l
Chteau Lafleur as lots 479
and 480 at Zachys' October 28,2005 auction, one for $18,564 and the other for $19,890. Koch
subsequently discovered each magnum is counterfeit. Therefore,
it is highly likely that the
magnums were imported to the United States and injected into the marketplace by Defendants.
A magnum of purported 1921 Chteau Ptrus.
55.
Rodenstock atotal of 21 magnums of purported
l92l Chteau
Ptrus. During the same period,
six such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's, and at the
end of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned more magnums than
Defendants had already
imported. Given the significant number of magnums
Defendants
imported relative to the number of magnums auctioned; and the relationship between when the
-22Museum
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTERSON, P.. Tower I 50 West Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33I 30 ' 305-789-3200

magnums \/ere imported and when they were auctioned, it is likely that Defendants imported to
the marketplace all or nearly all of the magnums auctioned during this time period as l92l
Chteau Ptrus. Given that Defendants imported their magnums from Rodenstock, an infamous
counterfeiter,
it is overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to the markelace all or

l92l
Chteau Ptrus.
nearly all of the counterfeit magnums auctioned during this time period as
During this period, Koch purchased a magnum of purported
l92l
Chteau Ptrus as
lot
443 at
Zachys' October 28,2005 auction for $33,151. Koch subsequently discovered the magnum is
counterfeit. Therefore,
it is highly likely the magnum was imported to the United States
and
Two bottles of purported 1928 Cteau Latour.
56.
In2002, an expert inspected in another collector's cellar three bottles of purported
1928 Chteau Latour. The expert labeled the bottles with Expert Stickers numbers 41 through
43. The bottles labeled 41 and 43 were counterfeit
and were purchased directly from
Defendants. The bottle labeled 42 was probably genuine and was acquired from another source.
Thereafter, Koch purchased three bottles of purported 1928 Chteau Latour as lots 408 and 409
1tZ,achys'October
28,2005 auction, one for $4,199 and the other two for $2,873 each. At least
two of these bottles of 1928 Chteau Latour had been labeled by the expert in the other
collector's cellar. The Expert Stickers, containing the expert's handwritten initials, were and are
still affixed to these bottles. They are bottles numbers
4l
and
42. The bottle labeled 41 is
counterfeit. It was imported and sold into the United States by Defendants. The bottle labeled 42 is genuine and was not imported or sold into the United States by Defendants. The third
bottle, which does not feature an Expert Sticker, is probably counterfeit. Given that the other two bottles were certainly identified as bottles 41 and 42by the expert, that this unlabeled bottle
-23
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTRSOITI. P.N. Museum Tower . 50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33i 30 . 305-789-3200
is probably counterfeit, and that the Expert Sticker would have been easy to remove,
unlabeled bottle is almost certainly the bottle that the expert labeled
the
43. Thus, it is highly likely
that two of Koch's counterfeit bottles of purporte d 1,928 Chteau Latour were imported and sold
into the United Sttes market by Defendants.
Two magnums of purported 1928 Chteau Ptrus.
57.
Rodenstock a total of four magnums of purported 1928 Chteau Ptrus. During the same period, three such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's, and atthe end of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned more magnums than
Defendants had already
imported. Given the significant number of magnums
Defendants
imported relative to the number of magnums auctioned, it is likely that Defendants imported to
the markelace all or nearly all of the magnums auctioned in the United States during this time
period
as lg28
Chteau
Ptrus. Given that Defendants imported their magnums
from
Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter,
it is overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to
the markelace all or nearly all of the counterfet magnums auctioned during this time period as
lg28
ChLteau
Ptrus. During this period, Koch purchased two magnums of purported 1928
lots 445 and446 atZachys'October 28,2005 auction, one for $14,586.28 and
Chteau Ptrus as
the other for $17,238.33. Koch subsequently discovered each magnum is counterfeit. Therefore,
it is highly likely
the magnums were imported to the United States and injected into
the
markelace by Defendants.
A maenum of purported 1947 Chteau Cheval Blanc.
58.
Import records show that between 1998 and 2008, Defendants imported from
Rodenstock a total of 47 magnums of purported 1947 Chteau Cheval Blanc. During the same
-24 Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTTRSON, P . . .l50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-289-3200
period, 80 such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's, and
none prior to Defendants' first import in 2000. During most of that period, spikes in auction
sales followed spikes in Defendants'
imports. Given the rarity of this vintage and format, and the
relationship between when the magnums were imported and when they were auctioned,
Defendants likely imported to the marketplace most or nearly most of the magnums auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1947 Chteau Cheval Blanc. Given that Defendants
imported their magnums from Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter, and that the owner of
Chteau Cheval Blanc doubts the authenticity of Rodenstock's large format bottles of Cheval
Blanc, it is overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to the marketplace the not all----o
majority-if
the
counterfet magnums auctioned during this time period as 1947 Chteau Cheval
Blanc. During this period, Koch purchased a magnum of purported 1947 Chteau Cheval Blanc
as
lot
413 at Acker's April 26,2005 auction for $12,925. Koch subsequently discovered the
magnum is counterfeit. Therefore,
it is highly likely
the magnum was imported to the United
States and injected into the markelace by Defendants.
A masnum of purported 1947 Clos L'Eglise Clinet.
59.
Rodenstock atotal
of 15 magnums of purported 1947 Clos L'Eglise Clinet. During the same
period, just seven such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and at the end of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned more magnums than Defendants had already imported. Given the rarity of this vintage and format, Rodenstock's
particular promotion
of this wine, and the relationship between when the magnums
\rere
imported and when they were auctioned, Defendants likely imported to the markelace the
majority of magnums auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1947 Clos
-25 STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTRsoN, p.I. Museum Tower . I 50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33'l30 . 305-789-3200
L'Eglise Clinet. Given that Defendants imported their magnums from Rodenstock, an infamous
counterfeiter, and that this wine
"is virtually
impossible
to find" in a
magnum,
it
is
overwhelmingly likely that Defendants imported to the marketplace the majority-if not all----of
the counterfeif magnums auctioned during this time period as 1947 Clos L'Eglise
Clinet. During
this period, Koch purchased a magnum of purported 1947 Clos L'Eglise Clinet as lot 516 at
Zachys' October 28, 2005 auction
for $19,890. Koch subsequently discovered the bottle
is
counterfeit. Therefore, it is highly likely that the bottle was imported to the United States and
Two magnums of purported 1947 Chteau Lafleur.
60.
Rodenstock a total of eighteen magnums of purported 1947 Chteau Lafleur. During the same period, precisely eighteen such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and
Sotheby's, and at the end of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned
more magnums than Defendants had already imported. Given the rarity of this vintage; the
precise match between the number of magnums Defendants imported and number of magnums
auctioned; and the relationship between when the magnums \ryere imported and when they were
auctioned, it is likely that Defendants imported to the markelace all of the magnums auctioned
in the United States during this time period as 1947 Chteau Lafleur. Furthermore, according to
an owner of the Chteau, just five magnums
of
1947 Chteau Lafleur were ever produced.
It is
highly unlikely that Defendants obtained all
five.
Much more likely, especially given that
Defendants imported their bottles from Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter, is that all of the eighteen bottles Defendants imported were counterfeit. Thus,
it is overwhelmingly likely
that
Defendants imported to the marketplace all of the counterfeir boftles auctioned during this time
-26
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON. P.N. .l50 West Flogler Streef ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33130 ' 305-789-3200 Museum Tower .
period as 1947 Chteau Lafleur. During this period, Koch purchased two magnums of purported 1947 Chteau Lafleur as
lot
1464 at Zachys' December 2004 auctior, one for 523,323 and the
other for 519,440. Koch subsequently discovered each magnum is counterfeit. Therefore, it is
highly likely the magnums were imported to the United States and injected into the marketplace
by Defendants.
A magnum of purported 1947 Chteau Ptrus.
61.
Rodenstock a total of 31 bottles of purported 1947 Chteau Ptrus. During the same period, 25
such bottles were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's, and none prior to
Defendants' first import
in late 1999. During most of that period, spikes in auction sales
followed spikes in Defendants' imports. Given the rarity of this vintage and format; the near
match between the number of bottles Defendants imported and number of bottles auctioned; and the relationship between when the magnums were imported and when they were auctioned, it is
likely that Defendants imported to the marketplace most or nearly all of the bottles auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1947 Chteau Ptrus. Given that Defendants
imported their bottles from Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter,
it is overwhelmingly likely
that Defendants imported to the markelace all or nearly all of the counterfet bottles auctioned during this time period as 1947 Chteau Ptrus. During this period, Koch purchased a magnum
of purported 1947 Chteau Ptrus as lot 431 at Acker's April 2005 auction for $5,816.
The
magnum was consigned to Acker by Rudy Kurniawan. Koch subsequently discovered the
magnum is counterfeit. Therefore,
it is highly likely
the magnum was imported to the United
States and injected into the markelace by Defendants.
Five magnums of purported 1950 Chteau Lafleur.
-27 Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITte RsoN, p. . I 50 Wesi Flogler Sfreet . Suite 2200 . Momi, FL 331 30 . 305-789-3200
62.
Rodenstock a total
of nine magnums of purported 1950
Chteau
Lafleur. During the same
period, precisely nine such magmrms were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and
Sotheby's, and at the end of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned
more magnums than Defendants had already imported. Given the rarity of this vintage and
format; the precise match between the number of magnums Defendants imported and number of
magnums auctioned; and the relationship between when the magnums \Mere imported and when
they were auctioned, it is likely that Defendants imported to the marketplace all or nearly all
of
the magnums auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1950 Chteau Lafleur.
Given that Defendants imported their magnums from Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter, it is
counterfeit magnums auctioned during this time period as 1950 Chteau Lafleur. During this period, Koch purchased five magnums of purported 1950 Chteau Lafleur as lots 492,493, and
494 atZachys'October 28,2005 auction. Two he purchased for$17,238 each and the other
three he purchased
for
$14,14
4 each. Koch subsequently
discovered each magnum is
counterfeit. Therefore, it is highly likely the magnums were imported to the United States and
Four maenums of purported 1950 Chteau Ptrus.
63.
Rodenstock a total of nine magnums of purported 1950 Chteau Ptrus. During the same period,
precisely nine such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's, and at the end
of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned more
magnums than Defendants had already imported. Given the rarity of this vintage and format; the
_28
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTE RsoN, p.n. Museum Tower . 50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33i 30 . 305-289-3200
precise match between the number
of
magnums Defendants imported and the number of
magnums auctioned; and the relationship between when the magnums were imported and when
they were auctioned, it is likely that Defendants imported to the marketplace all or nearly all of the magnums auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1950 Chteau Ptrus.
Given that Defendants imported their magnums from Rodenstock, an infamous counterfeiter, it is
counterfeit magnums auctioned during this time period as 1950 Chteau Ptrus. During this
period, Koch purchased a total of four magnums of purported 1950 Chteau Ptrus. Koch
purchased one magnum of purported 1950 Chteau Ptrus as lot 1454 atZachys'December 2004
auction for $14,258. Koch also purchased three magnums of purported 1950 Chteau Ptrus as
lots 448, 449, and 450 at Zachys' October 28, 2005 auction, one for $18,890, and two for $22,542 each. Koch subsequently discovered each magnum is counterfeit or probably counterfeit. Therefore, is highly likely the magnums were imported to the United
States and
A magnum of purported 1961 Chteau l?afleur.
64.
Rodenstock at least 47 magnums of purported 1961 Chteau Lafleur. During the same period,
25 such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys,and Sotheby's, and at the
end of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned more magnums than Defendants had already imported. Given the rarity of this vintage and format; the overwhelming
number of magnums Defendants imported compared to the number of magnums auctioned; and the relationship between when the magnums \/ere imported and when they were auctioned, it is
likely that Defendants imported to the marketplace all or nearly all of the magnums auctioned in
-29
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTRSON, p.n. Museum Tower . I 50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33.I 30 . 305-789-3200
the United States during this time period as 1961 Chteau Lafleur. Given that Defendants
imported their magnums from Rodenstock,
ffi
infamous counterfeiter,
it is overwhelmingly
likely that Defendants imported to the marketplace all or nearly all of the counterfeif magnums
auctioned during this time period as 1961 Chteau Lafleur. During this period, Koch purchased
a magnum of purported 196I Chteau Lafleur as
lot 1472 atZachys'December 2004 auction for
$16,849. Koch subsequently discovered the magnum is counterfeit. Therefore, it is highly likely
the magnum was imported to the United States and injected into the marketplace by Defendants.
Three magnums of purported I.961 Chteau Ptrus.
65.
Rodenstock a total
of
107 magnums of purported 196l Chteau Ptrus. During the same period,
38 such magnums were sold at auctions by Christie's, Acker, Zachys, and Sotheby's, and at the
end of no quarter during that period had the four auction houses auctioned more magnums than Defendants had already imported. Given the rarity of this vintage and format; and the significant number of magnums Defendants imported relative to the number of magnums auctioned; and the
relationship between when the magnums \ryere imported and when they were auctioned,
it
is
likely that Defendants imported to the markelace all or nearly all of the magnums auctioned in the United States during this time period as 1961 Chteau Ptrus. Given that Defendants
imported their magnums from Rodenstock,
infamous counterfeiter,
it is overwhelmingly
likely that Deftndants imported to the marketplace all or nearly all of the counterfelf magnums
auctioned during this time period as 1961 Chteau Ptrus. During this period, Koch purchased
three magnums
of
purported 196l Chteau Ptr.us. Koch purchased from Tribeca V/ine
Merchants two magnums of purported 1961 Chteau Ptrus for $11,500 each. Koch purchased a magnum of purported 1961 Chteau Ptrus as lot 433 at Acker's April2005 auction for $13,571.
-30STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF

Museum Tower
. 150 Wesl Flogler Street . Suite 2200 .
Miom, FL 33 30
& SITTRSONI, P.N. . 305-789-3200
The magnum was consigned to Acker by Rudy Kurniawan. Koch subsequently discovered each
of the three magnums is counterfeit or probably counterfeit. Therefore, it is highly likely

magnums were imported to the United States and injected into the marketplace by Defendants.
the
66. IX.
The totl price that Koch paid for the 32 bottles of wine described in paragraphs
48 to 65 is $547,693.
Defendants Made Material Misrepresentations with Respect to Each Counterfeit Bottle It Imported and Sold into the United States.
67.
Defendants knew at the time they imported or sold each of the wines described at
paragraphs 48 to 65 that the wine was counterfeit or was probably counterfeit. Defendants knew
that Rodenstock was an infamous counterfeiter. Defendants knew that Rodenstock had exported
to them very rare wines in quantities that were improbable, impossible, md
unbelievable.
Defendants knew, no later than2003 and probably much earlier, that customers considered wine
Defendants had imported from Rodenstock to be counterfeit. Finally, Defendants had ample
opportunity to inspect each of the wines they imported from Rodenstock. Self-proclaimed wine
experts that Defendants are, Defendants had ample ability to determine for themselves that the
wines were counterfeit. They did import and to sell these wines.
so. Yet for
more than a decade, Defendants continued to
68.
Defendants represented the wines described in paragraphs 48 to 65 to be genuine,

each
by the nature of each relevant sales transaction, as well as verbally and in writing on
relevant invoice or receipt. Defendants'representations were material. Defendants' customers
reasonably relied on Defendants' representations
in making their purchases.
Furthermore,
Defendants reasonably believed and expected that their customers were likely in the future to sell, trade, consign, or otherwise transfer any or all the wine that Defendants had imported and sold them. Defendants reasonably believed and intended that in selling, trading, consigning, or
- 3t STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &- SITTIRSON. NN. Museum Tower . I 50 West Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33.l 30 ' 305-789-3200
transferring such wine, their customers would repeat Defendants' representations regarding the
genuineness of the wine, and that Defendants' fraudulent representations would reasonably cause others to believe the wine was genuine.
69.
Defendants represented the wines described nparagraphs 48 to 65 to be genuine,

and
by the nature and condition of each bottle, as well as by the language, images, nature,
condition
of
each label thereon. Defendants' representations were material. Defendants'
customers reasonably relied
on
Defendants' representations
in
making their
purchases.
Furthermore, Defendants reasonably believed and expected that their customers were likely in
the future to sell, trade, consign, or otherwise transfer any or all wine that Defendants had
imported and sold them. Defendants reasonably believed and intended that in selling, trading, consigning, or transferring such wine, the nature and condition of the bottle, as well as the
language, images, nafiffe, and condition of the label thereon, would reasonably cause others to believe the wine was genuine, and to rely upon that belief.
70.
Defendants represented the wines described atparagraphs 48 to 65 to be genuine
by the language and nature of Defendants' advertising. Defendants advertised on Royal's

website, by fax, and by email. Royal's website claims, "[w]e carry the great and rare Bordeaux from the 19th century to the present," and "[o]ur inventory ... is filled with the greatest producers on earth." Defendants frequently solicited customers by
fax. A New York Times article, which
Defendant Sokolin stated
in an affidavit "fairly
describes Royal's business," explains that
Defendant sent "faxes ... almost nightly to the store's customers alerting them to the small lots of interesting wines that Royal's partners specialize in seeking
out." Richard Grimes,
Treasure
Islands in a Sea of Wine, New Yom TIves, June 30, 1999. As the article explains, these faxes
were "the heart and soul of [Defendant's] operation." In recent years, Defendants have continued
-32STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON. P.A. .l50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200 Museum Tower .
to advertise in substantially the same manner, except that most of their faxes have been replaced by emails.
71.
to
In order to import each of the wines described atparagraphs 48 to 65, Defendants
used interstate and intemational wires, including but not limited to facsimile and telephone lines,
communicate orders and other relevant information
to
Rodenstock, their supplier of
counterfeit wine. In order to sell each of the wines described atparugraphs 48 to 65, Defendants used interstate wires. Regularly and continually from at least 1998 to 2008, Defendants sent
faxes and emails worldwide and throughout the United States, including Florid4 touting
Rodenstock's counterfeit wine as genuine. During the same period, Defendants also sent faxes
of
invoices, receipts, and other supporting documents to customers, including to multiple customers
in Florida.
X.
In order both to sell and to import counterfeit wine. Defendants used interstate and international mails. Defendants imported counterfeit wine vi4 international mails. and using international common carriers. including Lufthansa. Defendants shipped
counterfeit wine to domestc customers via interstate commercial carriers such as X'edEx and UPS. Usins these methods. Defendants shipped counterfeit wines to Florida.Koch Relied On Defendants'Material Misrepresentations In Choosine To Purchase Each of the 32 Counterfeit \ilineS.
72. As Defendants foresaw and intended,

passed through the
their material misrepresentations
were
65
market. For instance, each of the 32 wines described in paragraph 48 to
was resold at one of several auctions held by the auction houses Acker andZachys. Prior to each
auction, Acker or T.achys distributed an auction catalog describing the wines
it
offered for
auction. In describing each of the wines, the catalogs repeated Defendants' explicit or implicit
representations that the wine derives from the producer and the vintge identified on its label.
73-
Since a consignor cannot sell a purported rare bottle of wine without representing
the wine's producer and vintage, the consignor made identical representations. Each auction
house relied on these representations
in drafting the above

-33 -
descriptions and representations,
STEARNS WEAVER
Museum Tower
I50
West Flogler Street
MIU-R WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTIRSON, P.N. . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
basing its description in large part on the consignor's representations. The auction horses expect that
if a consignor knows of any reason to doubt the authenticity of a wine,
he or she
will reveal
such reason. In certain of these instances, Royal was the consignor. In others, the consignor was
yet another intermediary who in tum based his representations as to the wine's producer and
vintage on the representations of the bottle's source. With respect to all 32 of these bottles, that
source was Royal. Thus, Defendants caused numerous material misrepresentations, upon which buyers such as Koch relied.
74. .
Specifrcally, in or about December 2l}4,Defendants caused Zachysto make the
following statements in its December 2004 auction catalog:

Defendants caused Zachys to represent
lot
1464 to be "Chateau Lafleur 1947,"
when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot 1464 was
not produced by Chateau Lafleur and was not producedin 1947;
Defendants caused Zachys to representlot 1472 to be "Chateau Lafleur 1961,"
when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot 1472 was
not produced by Chateau Lafleur and was not produced in 1961"; and
lot 1.454 to be "Chateau Petrus 1950,'
when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot 1454 was not produced by Chateau Petrus and was not produced in 1950.
75. In or about April

statements in its
2005, Defendants caused Acker
to
make the following
April2005 auction catalog:
o
in fact, and
Defendants caused Acker to represent lot 433 to be "Chateau Petrus 196l,' when
as Defendants knew, the wine contained
in the bottle described as lot 433 was not
produced by Chateau Petrus and was not produced in 1961;
-34STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTRSON, ... Museum Tower . 50 West Flogler Street . Suife 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33130 '305-789-3200
Defendants caused Acker
to represent lot 413 to be "Chateau Cheval Blanc
194'1," when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot
413 was not produced by Chateau Cheval Blanc and was not producedin 1947; and
Defendants caused Acker to represent lot 431 to be "Chateau Petrus 1947," when
in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot 413 was not
produced by Chateau Petrus and was not producedinl947.
76. In or about October .

in fact, and
2005, Defendants caused Zachys
to make the following
statements in its October 2005 auction catalog: Defendants caused Zachys to represent lot 380 to be "Chateau Lafite 1811," when
in the bottle described as lot 380 was not
produced by Chateau Lafite and was not produced in 1811;
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lot 401
to be "Chateau Latour
1864,"
when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot 401 was not produced by Chateau Latour and was not produced in 1864;
lot 402 to be "Chateau Latour
1865,"
when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot 402 was not produced by Chateau Latour and was not produced in 1865;
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lots 386 and 389 to be "Chateau Lafite
Rothschild 1870," when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottles
described as lots 389 was not produced by Chateau Lafite and was not produced in 1870;
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lots 357 and 358 to be "Chateau Cheval
Blanc 1921" when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as
lots 357 and 358 was not produced by Chateau Petrus and was not produced in
l92l;
-35STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTRSON. P.,. Museum Tower . 150 West Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33130 ' 305-789-3200
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lots 479 and 480 to be "Chateau Lafleur
I92I" when in fact, and
in the bottle described as lots
479 and480 was not produced by Chateau :Lafleur and was not producedinl92l;
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lot 443 to be "Chateau Petrus 1921," when
in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot 443 was not
produced by Chateau Petrus and was not
producedinl92|'
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lots 408 and 409 to be "Chateau Latour
1928" when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lots 408 and 409 was not produced by Chateau Latour and was not produced in 1928;
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lots 445 and 446 to be "Chateau Petrus
1928" when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lots
445 and446 was not produced by Chateau Petrus and was not producedin 1928;
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lot 516 to be "Clos L'Eglise Clinet 1947," when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described as lot 516 was not produced by Chateau Clos L'Eglise Clinet and was not producedin 1947;
Defendants caused 7-achys to represent lots 492, 493, and, 494 to be "Chateau
Lafleur 1950" when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described
as lots 492,493, and494 was not produced by Chateau Lafleur and was not produced
in 1950;
Defendants caused Zachys to represent lots 448, 449, and 450 to be "Chateau
Petrus 1950," when in fact, and as Defendants knew, the wine contained in the bottle described
as lots 448,449, and 450 was not produced by Chateau Petrus and was not produced
in
1950;
77.
Each of these representations contained at least two material falsehoods: one as to
the wine's producer and another as to its vintage. Defendants further caused Acker and Zachys
-36STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTERSON, P... Museum Tower . I 50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 331 30 . 305-789-3200
to
repeat and affirm each of these misrepresentations in their promotional materials associated
with each auction, and during each auction.
Defendants also made these
or
similar
representations on or before the dates of these auctions in invoices, and other documents.
78.
Koch or Koch's agent received such auction catalogs and read such
catalog
descriptions prior to purchasing each of the wines described in paragraphs 48 to 65. [n choosing
to bid on and to purchase each of the wines, Koch relied on their catalog descriptions, including
those portions which repeated Defendants!material misrepresentations. Most prominently, Koch
relied on Defendants' representation that, each wine derives from the producer and vintage
identified on its label. These representations was false in two material ways. Koch also received
and relied on Defendants' misrepresentations as repeated or afirmed in the auction

promotional materials and at each auction.
houses'
79.
Additionally, Defendants' material misrepresentations were literally printed on
each counterfeit bottle they sold: the producer and vintage indicated on the bottle's label did and
continue to misrepresent the producer and vintage of the wine therein, Defendants, by their sale and distribution of the 32 bottles, affirmed and vouchsafed the representations printed on each
bottle's label, knowing that such representations were false with respect to producer and to vintage. Koch or Koch's agents likewise relied on the misrepresentations printed on the face of
each
bottle. These representations, by their nature, are continuous and ongoing.
80.
Koch would not have purchased the wines
if he or his agent had not read such

if
he or his agent had not
representations in the auction catalogs or promotional materiatrs, and
heard such misrepresentations during the auctions. And he would not have purchased the bottles
if
the representations as to producer and vintage were not printed on the label of each bottles.
Furthermore, Koch would not have purchased the wines if he knew that such misrepresentations
-37 Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTRSOI.I, P . . 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-/89-3200
were false or likely false. Each of the wines described in paragraph 48 to 65 is kept and stored in Palm Beach, Florida.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Cotr,tlroN
Lew FneuP)
DereNpeNrs)
(Acar,isr
All
81. 82.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs I
through 80 of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein. Defendants made material misrepresentations
to and concealed or
suppressed
material facts from third party purchasers, collectors, and resellers
of
rare wines. Such
misrepresentations and suppressed material facts include those listed in paragraphs 1 through 81.
83.
Defendants' misrepresentations or omissions were material and were false and
misleading, and Defendants knew they were material and were false and misleading at the time
they made them.
84.
In misrepresenting or omitting these facts, Defendants intended to cause, and had
reason to expect they would cause, purchasers and collectors of rare wines, a group that includes
Plaintift to act in reliance upon the misrepresentations or omissions, whether directly or

indirectly as foreseeably passed along by third parties.
85.
Plaintiff did reasonably
and
justifiably rely on Defendants'misrepresentations and
omissions in purchasing the 32 bottles of counterfeit wine described in paragraphs 48 through 65.
86. At the time
Plaintiff acted, Plaintiff was unaware of the
misrepresented,
concealed, or suppressed facts and would have acted diferently

facts.
if Plaintiff
had known the true
-38STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON, p.,{. Museum Tower . I 50 West Flogler Street . Suiie 2200 ' Miomi, FL 331 30 ' 305=789-3200
87.
Each of the counterfeit wines purchased by Plaintiffis essentially worthless. As a
rsult of Plaintiffs reliance upon Defendants' misrepresentations, Plaintiff has suffered damages in an amount to be proved atftial, but not less than 5547,693. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Crvrr. CoNspnecy To Dprneuo)
(carNsr Ar.r. DBraruoerurs)
88.
through 80 of this Complaint as though set forth in full herein.
89. At all times relevant to this complaint,
Defendants and Rodenstock knowingly
and intentionally agreed to mislead purchasers and collectors of rare wines, a group that includes
Plaintifl by creating, importing,
and selling counterfeit wines as genuine.
90. gl.
In firrtherance of their conspiracy, Defendants and Rodenstock committed the acts
described herein, including those described in paragraphs
I through 87.
In furtherance of their conspiracy, Defendants and Rodenstock made material
misrepresentations to and concealed or suppressed material facts from third parfy purchasers,
collectors, and resellers of rare wines. Such misrepresentations and suppressed material facts
include those listed in paragraphs
1
through 87.
92.
The omissions or representations by Defendants and Rodenstock were material
and were false and misleading, and Defendants and Rodenstock knew they were material and were false and misleading at the time they made them.
93.
In misrepresenting or omitting these facts, Defendants and Rodenstock intended
to cause, and had reason to expect they would cause, purchasers and collectors of rare wines, a
_39
Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITIRSON. P.N. . I50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33 30 . 305-789-3200

group that includes Plaintifl to act in reliance upon the misrepresentations or omissions, whether
directly or indirectly as foreseeably passed along by third parties.
94.
Plaintiff did reasonably and justifiably rely on Defendants' and
Rodenstock's
misrepresentations in purchasing the counterfeit bottles of wine described atparagraphs 48 to 65.
95. At the time Plaintiff

facts.
acted, Plaintiff was unaware
of the misrepresented,
had known the true
concealed, or suppressed facts and would have acted differently
if Plaintiff
96.
collectors
Defendants and Rodenstock acted with a specific intent to harm purchasers and
of
rare wines,
a group that
includes Plaintiff, and knowingly and intentionally

evade detection, and profit from
perpetrated a continuing scheme selling counterfeit wines.
to sell counterfeit wines,
97.
Plaintiff has been injured by acts taken in fuitherance of the conspiracy between
Defendants and Rodenstock and has suffered damages

amount of which is to be determined at trial.
of no
less than 8547,693, the precise
98.
By virtue of Defendants' \rillful, wanton, and morally culpable conduct, aimed at

be
the public generally, Plaintiff is entitled to recover punitive damages in an amount to

determined at trial.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(AIprNc eNp AsprrrNc FRAUp)
(cerNsr
All DeneNpnxrs)
I
99.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs
-40STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON, PA. Museum Tower . 50 West Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33130 ' 305-789-3200
100. At all times relevant to this Complaint,
Defendants knew that Hardy Rodenstock
was acting to defraud Plaintiff, third parties, and purchasers and collectors of rare wines, a group
that includes Plaintifl by creating and selling wines that Defendants and Rodenstock knew to be counterfeit but which Rodenstock represented to be genuine.
101. Rodenstock did in fact defraud Plaintiff by, inter alia,
selling Plaintiff, via
Defendants, Defendants' customers, Christie's auctions, Acker auctions, and Zachys auctions, at least 32 bottles of wine that Rodenstock and Defendants knew to be counterfeit. Rodenstock
created or directed others to create each ofthe 32 bottles described inparagraphs 48 through 65,
including the fraudulent and misleading labels thereon. As Rodenstock intended and expected,
Plaintiff relied on Rodenstock's fraudulent and misleading labels and other representations
regarding the 32 boffles. So relying, Plaintiff purchased the 32 bottles at prices that far exceeded
their actual value, to his detriment and injury.
I02.
Defendants substantially assisted Rodenstock to defraud Plaintiff, third parties,
and purchasers and collectors of rare wines, a group that includes Plaintiff. Defendants
substantially assisted Rodenstock by serving as the primary conduit for his counterfeit wine to
the United States market. Defendants substantially assisted Rodenstock by importing to the
United States between 1998 and 2008 more than 800 bottles of his counterfeit rare wine,
including each of the 32 bottles described at parugraphs 48 to
65.
Defendants substantially
assisted Rodenstock by promoting, marketing, and selling his counterfeit rare wine in the United
States, including each
of
the 32 bottles described at paragraphs 48
to 65.
Defendants
substantially assisted Rodenstock by concealing that he had exported to the United States an improbable volume of particular vintages of rare wine that Defendants sold into the markelace. Defendants substantially assisted Rodenstock by concealing that he had exported to the United
-4rSTEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTERSON, p.. Museum Tower . 150 West Flogler Streef . Suiie 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200

States particular bottles
of rare wine Defendants sold into the marketplace.
Defendants
substantially assisted Rodenstock by agreeing to import and sell into the markelace wine from
Rodenstock despite knowing that Rodenstock was a prodigious counterfeiter who had defrauded and continued to defraud Plaintiff and others.
103. At the time Plaintiff
relied on Rodenstock's misrepresentations, Plaintiff was
unaware of the concealed or suppressed facts and would have acted differently
if Ptaintiff
had
known the true facts.
104. As a result of Defendants'
substantial and active assistance
of
Rodenstock's
fraudulent scheme, Plaintiffhas suffered damages of no less than $547,693, the precise amount
of which is to be determined attrial.
105. By Defendants' willful, wanton, and morally
culpable conduct, aimed at the
public generally, Plaintiff is entitled to recover punitive damages in an amount to be determined
attrial.
FOTJRTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(CTn RICO
18 U.S.C. $ 1962)
(Acer,tsr ALL DereNpeNrs)
106. Plaintiff
incorporates
by reference the allegations set forth in
paragraphs I
107.
Section 1962(c) of Title 18 of the United States Code prohibits any person from
a
conducting an enterprise or participating in the conduct of an enterprise's affairs through

pattern of racketeering
activity. Section I964(d) of Title
18 provides that "[a]ny person injured
in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 ... may sue therefor in any
Museum Tower . 150 Wesf Flogler Street . Suite 2200 .
STEARNS
_42_ WEAVER MILLER WIssI-R ALHADEFF &
SITTe RsoN. p.n. Miomi, FL 33-l30 . 305-789-3200

appropriate United States district court." Plaintiff has been injured in his business and property by Defendants'violation of section 1962.
108.
As alleged inparagraphs
through 105, Defendants, in concert with Rodenstock,
have engaged in a paltem of racketeering
activ, the activities of which afFect
interstate and
foreign cotmerce. Plaintiff is one of many victims of such racketeerin g activity . Plaintiff relied
on
Defendants' misrepresentations
that wine
Defendants imported
was
genuine,
misrepresentations which were passed through the marketplace and were embodied in the wine
bottles Defendants sold. Plaintiff would not have purchased the 32 bottles of wine disclosed by Defendants that the wine was counterfeit. Each
if it had been
he
of the 32 counterfeit wines
purchased indirectly from Defendants is essentially worthless. The misrepresentations caused harm to Plaintiffin the full amount that he paid for them.
109. As
described herein, Defendants and Rodenstock operated together as an
association-in-fact enterprise. Rodenstock's role was, in part, to "discover" rare wine. In fact, as Defendants knew, Rodenstock counterfeited
it.
Defendants' role was to cultivate and to find
buyers for the rare wine Rodenstock "discovered," and then to import and sell the counterfeit
wine into the United States market. Defendants' role'required Defendants to advertise, to
promote, and to extol the virtues of those vintages of rare wine that Rodenstock counterfeited.
110.
The Rodenstock/RoyaVOliveros/Sokolin enterprise has been active since at least

Rodenstock
1998. Between 1998 and 2008, Defendants served as the primary conduit of
counterfeit wine into the United States. Defendants Sokolin and Oliveros \/ere both and each
responsible for top-level managerial, strategic, and executive decisions within the enterprise.
-43Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON, pn . 150 West Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33.I30 ' 305-789-3200
111. In the course of, and in
fuitherance
of this racketeering conduct and the

of
Rodenstock/RoyaVOliveros/Sokolin enterprise, Defendants engaged in wire fraud, in violation

18 U.S.C. $ 1343:
In an effort to promote its counterfeit wines, Defendants
"bombarded [their]
clients with faxes touting their latest finds," which they knew to be counterfeit.
Defendants sent these faxes "almost nightly," and the faxes were the "heart and soul of the operation." Richard Grimes, Treasure Islands in a Sea of Wine,New
Yom TIvtes, June 30, 1999. As detailed inparagaphs I tlnough
105, Defendants
sent faxes throughout the United States and the world repeatedly between at least
1998 and 2008 that contained false descriptions, and inaccurately described the
vintage and producer of counterfeit wines Defendants offered for sale. Such faxes
furthered Defendants' fraudulent scheme

unsuspecting public.
to sell counterfeit wine to
an
In an effort to import each of the wines described at paragraphs 48 to 65,

as each
as
well
1998
of the 2,067 bottles Defendants imported from Rodenstock between
and 2008, Defendants used interstate and intemational wires, including but not
limited to fax and telephone lines, to communicate orders and other relevant
information to Rodenstock, their supplier of counterfeit wine. Between 1998 and
2008, Defendants sent such faxes to Germany regularly and repeatedly. The faxes
furthered Defendants' fraudulent scheme

unsuspecting public.
to sell counterfeit wine to an
ll2. In the course of, and in furtherance ol
this racketeering conduct and the of
RodenstocVRoyaUOliveros/Sokolin enterprise, Defendants engaged in mail fraud, in violation
-44STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &- SITTERSON, P-N. ,l50 Wesf Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33'l30 ' 305-289-3200 Museum Tower .

18 U.S.C. $ 1341. Between at least 1998 and 2009, Defendants regularly imported counterfeit
wine to the United States via international common carriers, including Lufthansa. Between at
least 1998 and 2008, Defendants regularly shed counterfeit wine
it
had imported from
Rodenstock to customers via interstate commercial carriers such as FedEx and UPS.
113. As a proximate
proximate result
result
of Defendants' wire and mail fraud activities,
and as a
of
Defendants' criminal enterprise, Koch has suffered damages, including
paying for the 32 bottles of wine at prices that far exceed their actual value. Plaintiffs property
has been injured by reason of a violation
of
18 U.S.C.
L962 and he is entitled to treble damages
under 18 U.S.C. $ 196a(c). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. $ 1964(a), this Court should restrain and enjoin further violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962. The Defendants' pattern of racketeering activity
has extended over a substantial period of time and it is continuing, warranting injunctive relief.
FIFTH CLAIM F'OR RELIEF' (VIolertoN or SBcrtoN 501.204 op rsB FLoRne Deceprrvp exo UNrerR TReoe Pnecrrcps
Acr)
(Acer{sr ALL DereNpeNrs)
lI4.
115.
through 80 of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein. The Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA") $ 501.204
prohibits "[u]nfair methods of competitior unconscionable acts or practices, and unfair or

deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.rr
116. As alleged herein, Defendants
have engaged
in materially unfair
methods
of
competition, unconscionable acts or practices, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in

conducting trade and commerce in the state of Florida. Defendants engaged in such methods,
-45STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTRsoI., p.n. Museum Tower . I50 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-289-3200

acts, and practices by importing and selling to consumers in Florida bottles of purported rare
wine that Defendants knew to be counterfeit; misrepresenting to consumers in Florida and others
that bottles of wine Defendants knew to be counterfeit were genuine; and falsely advertising, by sending mass faxes and emails to Florida and elsewhere that misrepresented the authenticity wines, and by representing on Royal's website that Defendants sold genuine rare wine.
of
lI7.
Such methods, acts, and practices were directed at and affected consumers in
Florida" including purchasers and collectors of rare wines, a group that includes Plaintifl in violation of FDUTPA $ 501.204. Defendants'methods, acts, and practices described herein were
likely to mislead, and did mislead, by causing reasonable purchasers and collectors of rare wines
to rely upon Defendants' false representations and advertising.
118. FDUTPA $ 501.211(2)
provides in relevant part that "anyone aggrieved by
violation of this part may bring an action to obtain declaratory judgment

actual damages, plus attorney's fees and court costs."
...
[and] may recover
119.
Plaintiff reasonably and justifiably relied on Defendants' deceptive, misleading or
false representations and advertising in purchasing the 32 bottles of counterfeit wine described at paragraphs 48 to 65.
120. Defendants'violation of FDUTPA
$ 501.204 has caused Plaintiffto suffer injury
including, inter alia, paying for the 32 counterfeit bottles of wine described in paragraphs 48 to
65. As a result of Defendants'violation of FDUTPA $ 501.204, Plaintiff has suffered

in an amount to be proved at trial, but not less than 5547,693.
damages
L2I.
Defendants willfully and knowingly engaged in the conduct alleged herein.
122. Plaintiff is entitled to damages,
including injunctive relief, declaratory relief,
attomeys' fees, and court costs pursuant to FDUTPA $ 501.204.
-46STE.RS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON. P.,A. Museum Tower 150 West Flogler Street ' Suite 2200 ' Miomi, FL 33130 ' 305-789-3200
Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 47 of 48 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffprays for judgment inhis favor
as
follows:
a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j.
Injunctive relief to prohibit further wrongdoing by Defendants;

Damages
for all injuries suffered as a result of Defendants' unlawful
conduct;
Exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at trial; Punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial; Declaratory relief, as appropriate under FDUTPA $ 501.211; Attorney's fees, as appropriate under FDUTPA $ 501.211; Court costs, as appropriate under FDUTPA $ 501.21l; Treble damages, as appropriate under 18 U.S.C. $ 196a(c);
Pre-judgment interest; and Such other and further legal and equitable relief as may be just and proper.
_47
Museum Tower
STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF &. SITTERSON, P.A. . 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33130 . 305-789-3200
DEMAND F'OR JURY TRIAL

Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff demands trial by
jury in this action for all

Dated: October
issues so triable.
27,2011
Respectfully submitted,
Jay B. S
(77636r)
Abigail G. Corbett (31332)

acorbett@stearnsweaver. com SrBeRNs V/BnwR Mru.eR V/erssleR
Alnlperr & StrrensoN,
P.A. 150 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200 Miami, FL 33130 (30s) 789-3200
John C. Hueston (pro hac vice application forthcoming) Marshall A. Camp Qro hac vice application forthcoming)
IRr.l & Meuelra LLP
1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900 Los Angeles, California 90067 -427 6 (310) 203-7ts2
Attorneysfor Plantff
-48STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF & SITTERSoN. p.. Museum Tower . I 50 West Flogler Streef . Suite 2200 . Miomi, FL 33I 30 . 305-789-3200

Koch Vs Royal Wine Merchant - Daniel Oliveros & Jeff Sokolin

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Koch Vs Royal Wine Merchant - Daniel Oliveros & Jeff Sokolin

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 1 of 48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COTJRT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLOzuDA

COMPLAINT Plaintiff William I. Koch ("Koch" or "Plaintiff'), on personal knowledge

Wine counterfeiters employ a variety of techniques. One technique is to obtain an

authentic empty wine bottle,

with inauthentic wine, affix a counterfeit label that

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 2 of 48

simply as bad luck. Not until Plaintiffs recent

that from at least 1998

2008, Defendants knowingly purchased hundreds

counterfeit wine and injected them into the marketplace.

real, the hundreds of counterfeit

Defendant Royal Wine Merchants is a corporation organized in New York Stte

that operates a retail wine store in New York

least as recently as May 201I, Royal's

of Royal. On information and belief, at aIl times relevant to this Complaint,

Defendants Oliveros and Sokolin were each and both responsible

for Royal's day to

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 3 of 48

In the fine wine community,

Defendants Sokolin and Oliveros are and were

in the Bottle?, SLnre, June 14,2010,

http / / www . slate.c oml idl 22 5 67 7 5 .

1990s, Defendants Sokolin and Oliveros met and befriended Hardy

counterfeit wine that he claims

of counterfeit rare wine into the

United Sttes market.

Records of a wine importing, distributing, and brokering company located in New

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 4 of 48

It tums out the wines

were too fine, too prized, and too rare to be genuine.

for further investigation or discovery, Koch will likely have

promote, and sell his counterfeit wine as genuine.

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 5 of 48

12. 13. 1415.

PlaintiffWilliam I. Koch is aresident andctizenof the State of Florida.

is a citizen of the State of New

Cresskill, New Jersey.

JT]RISDICTION AND VENUE

and 18 U.S.C. $ 1965(a) and

(b). Koch is and has at all times relevant to this complaint

of Florid4 residing in the Southern District of Florida.

Defendants have committed

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 6 of 48

In the mid to late 1990s, Defendants reached an illicit agreement-whether tacit

expensive Bordeaux. Rodenstock would then export to

of that vintage of expensive Bordearx.

The agreement offered

All or nearly all of the bottles

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 7 of 48

Rodenstock's long-term scheme duped numerous collectors, including Koch.

In order to succeed in his decades-long wine fraud, Rodenstock needed to create

suspicion. Defendants helped him achieve both goals.

Defendants also promoted the wine aggressively. In addition to hosting tastings

on Rodenstock's behalf, the Defendants each undertook specific responsibilities. Oliveros,

STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER ALHADEFF

. 150 West Flogler Street . Suite 2200 .

Case 9:11-cv-81197-DTKH Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2011 Page 8 of 48

quality. In the latter part of the 2000s,

with emails, but the emails included the

emails that such representations contained

least two material

genuine, the 2,067 total bottles Rodenstock delivered to Defendants