here is a copy of the official notice. If anybody wants to opt out so they can sue Kimmer AKA Heidi Diaz, or  kimkins,con independantly of the class for damages it tell you how near the bottom.

 NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION

 TO: EVERYONE WHO PURCHASED A MEMBERSHIP TO KIMKINS.COM THROUGH THE KIMKINS.COM WEB SITE (www.kimkins.com) FROM JANUARY 1, 2006 TO OCTOBER 15, 2007 PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY A CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT THAT IS CURRENTLY PENDING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, IN RIVERSIDE, CALILFORNIA.

INTRODUCTION

1. On May 20, 2009, the Riverside County Superior Court, located in Riverside, California, issued an order certifying this case to proceed as a class action.

2. The plaintiffs are six individuals who bought memberships to kimkins.com through the kimkins.com Website (www.kimkins.com) from January 1, 2006 to October 15, 2007. The defendants are Heidi Diaz, an individual, and Kimkins (also known as Kimkins.com), a business entity that conducts business in Corona, California.

 3. The plaintiffs contend that Diaz and Kimkins.com induced them into buying memberships for kimkins.com through false and misleading information provided on the Kimkins.com Web site. The plaintiffs contend that the defendants violated California Business & Professions Code § 17200, et seq., which authorizes courts to provide relief from unfair, unlawful, and fraudulent business practices. The plaintiffs also contend that Diaz and Kimkins.com violated common law prohibitions against fraud and negligent misrepresentation.

4. This notice provides you with information regarding the litigation, including the plaintiffs’ claims against the defendants and the current status of the litigation. This notice also provides you with information regarding the court’s class-certification order.

THE LITIGATION

The Plaintiffs’ Claims

5. This lawsuit is based on the plaintiffs’ claims that Diaz and Kimkins used unfair, unlawful, or fraudulent business practices to induce them into buying memberships to Kimkins.com. This lawsuit is also based on the plaintiffs’ claims that the false and misleading information contained on the kimkins.com Web site constituted fraud or negligent misrepresentation by Diaz and Kimkins.

6. Here’s a list of the kinds of misconduct that the plaintiffs have alleged: • that Diaz and Kimkins concocted a false persona, “Kim Drake” or “Kimmer” to sell memberships to Kimkins.com • that Diaz and Kimkins misled potential members into believing that “Kim Drake” was real by using photos of real women and then falsely claiming that the photos depicted “Drake” • that Diaz and Kimkins posted lied about “Drake’s” purported weight loss • that Diaz and Kimkins provided false or misleading information to Women’s World magazine • that Diaz and Kimkins fabricated 41 “success stories” and published on the Kimkins.com Web • that Diaz and Kimkins made up celebrity endorsements • that Diaz and Kimkins misused labels and metatags to steer Internet traffic to the Kimkins.com Website, in violation of the law • that Diaz and Kimkins misled potential members into believing that they were buying lifetime memberships, when in fact Diaz and Kimkins.com terminated memberships at their whim • that Diaz and Kimkins intended to mislead potential members and assumed that potential members would rely on her misrepresentations. The Defendants’ Position

7. Diaz and Kimkins have denied all allegations of wrongdoing and liability, and they continue to deny that they have done anything wrong. Diaz and Kimkins also have asserted various affirmative defenses to the plaintiffs’ claims.

THE COURT’S CLASS-CERTIFICATION ORDER

8. In an order filed May 20, 2009, the Court granted the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. The Court certified for class treatment the plaintiffs’ claims for equitable relief, including disgorgement of the subscription fees paid to Diaz and Kimkins by the plaintiffs and the members of the class.

 

 9. The certified class is defined as all individuals who purchased the Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Web site from January 1, 2006 through October 15, 2007. THE COURT HAS NOT EXPRESSED ANY OPINIONS REGARDING THE MERITS OF THE PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS

10. The Court ordered that this notice be provided to advise class members that this case is pending and that the Court has certified the case to proceed as a class action. You should not consider this notice or its mailing to be a statement by the Court that the plaintiffs are right or that their claims will prevail.

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLASS MEMBERS

11. You do not need to do anything to remain a member of the class. If you bought a Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Web site from January 1, 2006 through October 15, 2007—including either of those dates—you are automatically included in the class. Your rights will be represented by the plaintiffs and their attorneys. You will not be personally responsible for any attorney fees or for the any of the costs of this litigation.

 OPT OUT OF CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

12. You have the opportunity to opt out of the class action lawsuit as detailed herein. If you incurred a personal injury as a result of using the Kimkins.com aka Kimkins Diet, you have a right to opt out. Notices to opt must be sent to jtiedt@tiedtlaw.com or mailed to Tiedt & Hurd at 980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209, Corona, California 92879.

WHERE TO GO & WHOM TO CONTACT SHOULD YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION

13. This notice provides only a brief summary of this litigation. For further details, you should take one or both of the following steps: • Review the documents in the Court’s file for this lawsuit. Many of these documents may be viewed or obtained on-line at the following URL: http://public-access.riverside.courts.ca.gov/OpenAccess/ . You also may review the Court’s file in person by going to the Office of the Clerk of the Court for the Riverside Superior Court, during regular business hours. The Clerk’s office is located at 4050 Main Street, Riverside, California 92501. • Write a letter to the attorneys who are representing the plaintiffs and whom the Court has appointed to represent the class. Here are their names and their contact information: John E. Tiedt & Marc S. Hurd Tiedt & Hurd 980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209 Corona, California 92879 Michael L. Cohen Michael L. Cohen, a PLC 707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 4100 Los Angeles, California 90017 Ray Moore Moore Winter McLennan LLP 701 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 200 Glendale, California 92103-4232 If you decide to contact one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, please do so in writing. To make it easier for them or one of their staff members to respond, however, your letter should include both your e-mail address and your telephone number. There are estimated to be as many as 40,000 members in the class. So please, DO NOT CALL THE COURT OR ATTEMPT TO CONTACT THE COURT BY E-MAIL. DATE: ___________________________, 2009 ____________________________________ Hon. _________________________, Presiding Judge

The Judge left nothing to the imagination nor interpretation for Heidi realted to what has to be posted on the Kimkins.con website and where.

 

COURTS SUBSEQUENT RULING ON 11/02/09 @ 08:00 FOR DEPARTMENT RIDST
11/02/2009 – 8:00 AM DEPT. 05

HONORABLE MARK E JOHNSON, PRESIDING
CLERK: M. MARTINEZ
COURT REPORTER: NONE
COURT SUBSEQUENTLY RULES:
ORDER REGARDING CLASS THE COURT MAKES THE FOLLOWING ORDER REGARDING
CLASS NOTICE. THE NOTICE SHALL READ AS FOLLOWS:
HEIDI DIAZ AND KIMKINS.COM ARE DEFENDANTS IN A LAWSUIT THAT HAS BEEN CERTIFIED AS A NATIONWIDE
CLASS ACTION: JEANESSA FENDERSON, ET AL. V HEIDI DIAZ, ET AL., CASE NO. RIC483005, PENDING IN THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT IN RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA. TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THE LAWSUIT,
PLEASE CLICK ON THE FOLLOWING LINK:
THE TEXT SHOULD BE PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED ON THE LOWER HALF OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE KIMKINS.COM
WEB SITE. IT SHOULD BE 12 POINT, TIMES NEW ROMAN FONT WITH A BOX AROUND IT AS ABOVE.
CLERK’S CERTIFICATE OF MAILING RE: MINUTE ORDER
NOTICE SENT TO MICHAEL L COHEN A PROFESSIONALLAW CORP ON 11/02/09
NOTICE SENT TO MOORE WINTER MCLENNAN LLP ON 11/02/09
NOTICE SENT TO TIEDT & HURD ON 11/02/09
NOTICE SENT TO LAW OFFICE OF TIMOTHY P PEABODY ON 11/02/09
NOTICE SENT TO LAW OFFICES OF COTTLE & KEMP ON 11/02/09
NOTICE SENT TO COTTLE & KEEN ON 11/02/09

Kimmer, AKA Heidi Diaz, has been ordered by the judge to post on the Kimkins.con site the notice telling member who wish to opt out of the class action settlement what they need to do.

the final wording of this message will be approved in court on OCT 29 2009

 

Can’t wait to see how Kimmer spins this one after telling the kimkins.con membership that the class action suit was denied just one month ago.

 

it will also be posted on one of the DUCKs blogs

Kimmer has been posting inside the kimpire that the summary judgement was denied.

However the word denied never appears in the ruling. The judge said the motions were premature and the following needed to be done.

the court ordered Kimmer’s side to meet with John on OCT 15th in DEPT 5 of the court to discuss a method to notify potential class reps ( that would be all memebers of kimkins.con before Oct of 07), extent of damages incurred, and details of opting out for those who don’t want to be covered by the judgement should they wish to sue for damages too.

it is a far cry from being denied.
here is a copy of court order so everybody can see it

there’s a new message out about the kimkins Fraud class action case.
This is not a binding legal action yet.

woo hoo John has filed for a summary judgement

Since Kimmer has admitted under oath in her depositions that she committed the alledged frauds this should be an easy decision ofr the judge.

So who has the pool on will Kimmer show up and who is up for a road trip to Riverside for the final verdict?

WOO HOO!!! the last legal tactic for stopping the class action lawsuit was removed with the dismissal of Heidi Diaz’s (AKA Kimmer) bankruptcy case.
How she could claim bankruptcy with her income exceeding her current spending was beyond me too.

This has been a very bad yr for legal cases involving Heidi Diaz.
first her SLAPP is dismissed when she fails to show up for court.
then the class action fraud suit against her and her kimkins.con website is certified
and now the dismissal of her bankrutcy case.

Sure hope this trend continues for Ms Diaz and Kimkins.con

Case RIC483005 – FENDERSON VS DIAZ
Action:

HEARING RE: MOTION TO/FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION * BY JEANESSA FENDERSON
01/14/2009 – 8:30 AM DEPT. 04

HONORABLE MICHAEL B DONNER, PRESIDING
CLERK: L. HALL
COURT REPORTER: T. FOSTER
JEANESSA FENDERSON, KARIN BILLECI, TRISTA ESSEX, HEIDI MARTINEZ, KATHLEEN ROGERS, DIANA SHERBY REPRESENTED BY MICHAEL L COHEN A PROFESSIONALLAW CORP – JOHN TIEDT PRESENT.
MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION IS GRANTED.
FORMAL ORDER TO BE PREPARED, SERVED AND SUBMITTED BY COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF
 

 

 

Happy day  and congrats for all the folk who worked so hard to make this happen even if nobody ever heard their name or what they did to help this happen.

Seems Kimmer AKA heidi Diaz who fired her lawyer and was representing herself in this actions didn’t bother to go to court for the hearing after filing her bankruptcy paperwork the other day.

 

 we would all have loved to have seen the look on her face when she was sitting there last night scrolling through FWK and saw the copy of the court minutes from her hearing yesterday.

Kimmer AKA Heidi K Diaz has filed for personel bankruptcy.
How does this effect Kimkins.con and her new site Simple Choices Diet you might ask. Since both are run as sole proprietorship they are both covered by her actions.

Thats right the kimkins.con class action lawsuit has been stayed by the court based on the filing.

The dismissal hearings of her countersuits has also been stayed.

the laywer representing the many folk she is suing and the class action suit had this to say in a message to the class reps and those being countersued.

 

Heidi Diaz has filed bankruptcy protection.  All pending motions in the state court have been stayed for the time being.  The bankruptcy court will take jurisdiction.  I have attached the bankruptcy notice for your review.

Make no mistake, we will continue the fight in the bankruptcy court.

John Tiedt
Thank you John

 

Kimmer had this to say to members of her kimkins.con site in a post today
A quick note from legal counsel:

“Kimkins has filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy
code. Chapter 11 is a rule which permits reasonable reorganization of
debts under the bankruptcy laws of the United States. Chapter 11
bankruptcy is available to any business, whether organized as a
corporation or sole proprietorship, and to individuals.

This will allow Kimkins, as a viable business, to continue to service
its customers while paying debts under a reorganization plan. Moreover,
it will allow us to better address certain matters pending in the civil
courts. The process is a public proceeding and aimed solely at
protecting the interest of Kimkins and our members.”

Due to litigation over the past year we have a couple major debts and
this will help restructure those. This will not affect our day to day
operations. Prior to this news Kimkins had already been planning a
revamp of the website (appearance and software). ……

Since the only costs she has incurred from the lawsuit so far  was paying her lawyer it really makes one wonder about the timing of the firing of her lawyer and the filing of this action just days before the hearings.

 

 

Seem Kimmer and her admins are not the only ones with a quick finger on the ban button and sending folk to banned camp for no TOS violations nor even a legitimate reason.

 

As many of y’all know I walked away from my beloved Atkinsdietbulletinboard.com site after the Thanksgiving massacre  of 06 when 3 of the top 10 poster were banned and not for any TOS violation. I spent many hours exchanging PMs with the owner and one of the admins about this action and while agreeing it was not handled correctly and they should not have been banned no unbanning occurred.

I had tried picketing the site with a sign in my siggy saying I was on strike over the banning, but that was removed from my siggy by an admin and I was denied access to my siggy after I replaced it. Since membership  in an organization implies support of the actions of the management of the organization I resigned my membership and moved to anotherlow carb board.

I have recieved emails from the admin and owner of ADBB inviting me back and have informed them I would not return until the banned were unbanned.I recieved yet another invite just this week which I notified my IP was SPAM.

 Lo and behold I was surprised to discover the owner and admin had reconsidered and unbanned those  unjustly locked out that day and they were active again. In my excitement I was getting ready to return to the site as a supporting member again only to discover it was a cruel hoax and before a single post could appear on the board  welcoming them back  or even one written by any of them they were banned again for no TOS violation. The only good to come from this action is I’m glad I did not have to post a nevermind after posting a return to the site topic.