United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania

1 of 3

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?95176226531579-L_1_0-1

CLOSED,SPECIAL

United States District Court

Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:06-cv-04650-MAM

CATERBONE v. WENGER et al
Assigned to: HONORABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN
Case in other court: THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, 07-04475
Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

Date Filed: 11/17/2006

Date Terminated: 10/23/2007
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
STANLY J. CATERBONE

represented by STANLY J. CATERBONE

1250 FREMONT STREET
LANCASTER, PA 17603
PRO SE

Plaintiff
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
V.
Defendant
MR. RANDALL O. WENGER
OF THE LANCASTER COUNTY PROTHONETARY
Defendant
MATTHEW MR. BOMBERGER
OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF LANCASTER
COUNTY
Defendant
JUDGE MICHEAL GEORGELIS
LANCASTER COUNTY
Defendant
LEO J. ECKERT, JR.
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Defendant
KELLY S. BALLENTINE, ESQ.
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Defendant
MAYNARD HAMILTON, JR.
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Defendant
DENISE COMMINS
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Defendant
RICHARD H. SIMMS
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Defendant
STEVEN MYLIN
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Defendant
WILLIAM G. REUTER
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Defendant
MICHAEL SMITH
DAULPHIN COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
Defendant

7/9/2015 7:29 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania

2 of 3

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?95176226531579-L_1_0-1

OFFICER RONALD BEZZARD

OF THE EAST LAMPETER POLICE DEPARTMENT
Defendant
OFFICER THOMAS GJURICH
OF THE LANCASTER CITY BUREAU OF POLICE
Defendant
OFFICER ADAM CRAMER
OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPT
Defendant
CHIEF JOHN FIORILL
OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT
Defendant
OFFICER ROBERT BUSER
OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT
Defendant
ROBERT M. FEDOR
OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT
Defendant
SHERRIF ROBERT BOURNE
LANCASTER COUNTY, OF THE LANCASTER SHERIFFS
DEPARTMENT
Defendant
JOLYNN STEINMAN
POSTMASTER, CONESTOGA POST OFFICE
Defendant
NELSON BREWSTER
INVESTIGATOR, OF THE PA ATTORNEY GENERAL
OFFICE
Defendant
OFFICER MICAHEL K. SCHAEFER
OF MILLERSVILLE BORO POLICE
Defendant
LUIS FURINA
LANCASTER COUNTY COURT JUDGE
Defendant
JUDGE MICHAEL A. GEORGELIS
LANCASTER COUNTY COURT
Defendant
DONALD TOTARO
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
Defendant
MICAHEL DETECTIVE LANDIS
LANCASTER COUNTY

Date Filed

Docket Text

10/18/2006

1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by STANLEY J. CATERBONE.AFFIDAVIT.(ks, ) Additional attachment(s)
added on 10/29/2007 (mk, ). (Entered: 10/19/2006)

11/15/2006

2 MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE FILED BY STANLY J. CATERBONE.(gs) Additional attachment(s) added on 10/29/2007 (mk, ).
(Entered: 11/16/2006)

11/17/2006

3 ORDER THAT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT
PLAINTIFF SHALL AMEND HIS COMPLAINT SO AS TO PROVIDE A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P.
12(e). SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 11/16/2006. 11/17/2006 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED. (mbh, )
Additional attachment(s) added on 10/29/2007 (mk, ). (Entered: 11/17/2006)

11/17/2006

4 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE IS GRANTED. THE CLERK OF COURT MARK THIS ACTION
CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND PLACE THE MATTER IN THE CIVIL SUSPENSE FILE. SIGNED BY JUDGE

7/9/2015 7:29 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania

3 of 3

https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?95176226531579-L_1_0-1

MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 11/17/06. 11/20/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(fdc) (Entered: 11/20/2006)
11/17/2006

5 Complaint against DEFENDANTS MAYNARD HAMILTON, JR, DENISE COMMINS, RICHARD H. SIMMS, STEVEN MYLIN,
WILLIAM G. REUTER, MICHAEL SMITH, RONALD BEZZARD, THOMAS GJURICH, ADAM CRAMER, JOHN FIORILL,
ROBERT BUSER, ROBERT M. FEDOR, ROBERT BOURNE, JOLYNN STEINMAN, NELSON BREWSTER, MICAHEL K.
SCHAEFER, LUIS FURINA, MICHAEL A. GEORGELIS, DONALD TOTARO, MICAHEL DETECTIVE LANDIS, RANDALL O.
WENGER, MATTHEW MR. BOMBERGER, MICHEAL GEORGELIS, LEO J. ECKERT, JR and KELLY S. BALLENTINE, ESQ
filed by PLAINTIFFS ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP and STANLY J. CATERBONE.(mbh, ) Additional attachment(s) added on
10/29/2007 (mk, ). (Entered: 01/18/2007)

01/19/2007

6 ORDER THAT THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED CASE SHALL REMAIN IN CIVIL SUSPENSE UNTIL 4/19/07. SIGNED BY JUDGE
MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 1/19/07. 1/19/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(fdc) (Entered: 01/19/2007)

04/03/2007

7 ADDENDUM TO COMPLAINT filed by STANLY J. CATERBONE. Cert. of Service. (PRO SE) (pr, ) Additional attachment(s) added
on 10/29/2007 (mk, ). (Entered: 04/03/2007)

04/13/2007

8 STANLY J. CATERBONE'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE (#50 in 06-cv-4154).(fdc) (Entered: 04/13/2007)

04/16/2007

9 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE IS GRANTED. THIS CASE SHALL REMAIN IN CIVIL SUSPSENSE
UNTIL 6/19/07. SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 4/16/07.4/16/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO
CATERBONE.(fdc) (Entered: 04/16/2007)

04/26/2007

10 ORDER THAT THE PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN EX PARTE MEETING IS DENIED. SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A.
MCLAUGHLIN ON 4/25/07. 4/26/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(fdc) (Entered: 04/26/2007)

05/07/2007

11 Addendum to Complaint by STANLY J. CATERBONE (#11 in 06-cv-4154). (fdc) (Entered: 05/07/2007)

06/19/2007

12 STANLEY J. CATERBONE'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (#12 in 06-4154).(fdc) Additional
attachment(s) added on 6/19/2007 (ac, ). (Entered: 06/19/2007)

06/20/2007

13 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE IS GRANTED. THIS CASE SHALL REMAIN IN CIVIL SUSPENSE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PLAINTIFF SHALL INFORM THE COURT ON OR BEFORE 8/31/07 AS TO THE STATUS
OF THE CASE. SIGNED BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 6/19/07.6/20/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(fdc)
(Entered: 06/20/2007)

08/10/2007

14 EXHIBITS by plff STANLY J. CATERBONE. (gn, ) (Entered: 08/10/2007)

09/04/2007

15 Status of Case by STANLY J. CATERBONE. (stb, ) (Entered: 09/04/2007)

09/12/2007

16 ORDER THAT THE PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST DATED 8/30/07 TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT ON 11/15/07, IS DENIED.
THE PLAINTIFF MUST SERVE THIS COMPLAINT ON OR BEFORE 10/15/07, OR THE CASE WILL BE DISMISSED. SIGNED
BY JUDGE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 9/11/07. 9/12/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(fdc) (Entered: 09/12/2007)

10/15/2007

17 STANLY J. CATERBONE'S Amendment to Complaint and Motion for Continuance, Certificate of Service.(fdc) (Entered: 10/15/2007)

10/23/2007

18 ORDER THAT THIS CASE IS DISMISSED. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE IS DENIED. SIGNED BY JUDGE
MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 10/22/07.10/23/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO CATERBONE.(fdc) (Entered: 10/23/2007)

11/23/2007

19 NOTICE OF APPEAL by STANLY J. CATERBONE, Certificate of Service. (Filing Fee: IFP Status) Copies to Judge, Clerk USCA,
Appeals Clerk. (kw, ) (Entered: 11/26/2007)

11/23/2007

20 Clerk's Notice to USCA re 19 Notice of Appeal. (kw, ) (Entered: 11/26/2007)

12/10/2007

NOTICE of Docketing Record on Appeal from USCA re 19 Notice of Appeal filed by STANLY J. CATERBONE. USCA Case Number
07-4475 (jpd) (Entered: 12/10/2007)

10/20/2008

21 STANLEY J. CATERBONE'S MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.(fdc) (Entered:
10/20/2008)

10/30/2008

22 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO WITHDRAW IS GRANTED TO THE EXTENT IT REQUESTS DISMISSAL OF THE
CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 10/30/08.10/30/08 ENTERED AND
COPIES MAILED TO CATERBONE.(fdc) (Entered: 10/30/2008)

07/29/2011

23 ORDER of USCA as to 19 Notice of Appeal filed by STANLY J. CATERBONE. Re: Ordered and Adjudged by this Court that the
judgments of the District Court entered on 10/23/07, be and the same are hereby vacated and the cases are remanded for further
proceedings. Costs will not be taxed. All of the above in accordance with the opinion of this Court. (fdc) (Entered: 08/01/2011)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt
07/09/2015 19:26:33
PACER
Login:

am6446:3514696:0 Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search
Criteria:

2:06-cv04650-MAM

Billable
Pages:

Cost:

0.30

7/9/2015 7:29 PM

www.amgglobalentertainmentgrouQ.com
Case 2:06-cv-04650-MAM Document 5 Filed 11/17/06
Page 1 of 4
mailto:amgroup01@msn.com
717.731.8184 Pho
717.427-1621 a~

,~

Ii

. ,I

06 -4H50

Stanley J.i'i=aterbort"e'
Advanced Media Group
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 17516

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

STANLYJ. CATERBONE
AND ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

PLAINTIFF

v.
MR. RANDALL O. WENGER OF THE LANCASTER COUNTY PROTHONETARY
MR. MATHEW BOMBERGER, OFFICE OF PUBLIC DEFENDER
OF LANCASTER COUNTY
LANCASTER COUNTY JUDGE MICHAEL GEORGELIS
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE LEO ECKERT, JR.
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KELLY S. BALLENTINE, ESQ
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MAYNARD HAMILTON, JR.
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE JUDGE DENISE COMMINS
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE RICHARD H. SIMMS
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE STEVEN MYLIN
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE WILLIAM G. REUTER
DAUPHIN COUNTY DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MICHAEL SMITH
OFFICER RONALD BEZZARD OF THE EAST LAMPETER POLICE DEPARTMENT
OFFICER THOMAS GJURICH OF THE LANCASTER CITY BUREAU OF POLICE
OFFICER ADAM CRAMER OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPT
CHIEF JOHN FIORILL OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT
OFFICER ROBERT BUSER OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL POLICE DEPARTMENT
OFFICER ROBERT M. FEDOR OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL
POLICE DEPARTMENT '
LANCASTER COUNTY SHERRIF ROBERT BOURNE OF THE LANCASTER
COUNTY SHERRIFFS DEPARTMENT
JOLYNN STEINMAN, POSTMASTER, CONESTOGA POST OFFICE
NELSON BREWSTER, INVESTIGATOR, OF THE PA ATTORNEY GENERAL OFFICE
OFFICER MICAHEL K. SCHAEFER OF MILLERSVILLE BORO POLICE
LANCASTER COUNTY COURT JUDGE LUIS FURINA
LANCASTER COUNTY COURT JUDGE MICHAEL A. GEORGELIS
LANCASTER COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY DONALD TOTARO
LANCASTER COUNTY DETECTIVE MICAHEL LANDIS

CIVIL ACTION

CASE NO.

F:/(12

i';OV.. 17,
L
M~C

00

By

o'Z. Clerk
ep. C/ef/r

JURY TRIAL

DEFENDANTS

CIVIL ACTION CITING RICO CIVIL STATUTES

AND FEDERAL CIVIL RIGH
VIOLATIONS

Date: October 16, 2006

Page 1 of 16

10/16/2006

Case 2:06-cv-04650-MAM Document 5 Filed 11/17/06 Page 2 of 4

COMPLAINT

RICO Offenses And Definitions

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly referred to as RICO) is a
United States federal law, which provides for extended penalties for criminal acts performed as part of
an ongoing criminal organization. RICO was enacted by section 901(a) of the Organized Crime Control
Act of 1970, Pub. L. No. 91-452, 84 Stat. 922 (Oct. 15, 1970). RICO is codified as Chapter 96 of Title
18 of the United States Code, 18 U.S.C. 1961 through 18 U.S.c. 1968. It has been speculated that
the name and acronym were selected in a sly reference to the movie Little Caesar, which featured a
notorious gangster named "Rico." The original drafter of the bill, G. Robert Blakey, has refused to
confirm or deny this.
RICO addresses long-term, not one-shot, criminal activity. Not only must a RICO claim be
based upon criminal activity, but the criminal acts must constitute a "pattern" of criminal actlvttv. A
single criminal act, short-term criminal conduct, or criminal actions that bear no relationship to each
other will not give rise to a RICO claim. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that criminal
actions constitute a "pattern" only if they are related and continuous. In order to be "related," the
criminal acts must Involve the same victims, have the same methods of commission, involve the same
participants, or be related in some other fashion. A pattern may be sufficiently continuous if the
criminal actions occurred over a substantial period of time or posed a threat of indefinite duration.
The former patterns are referred to as closed-ended patterns; the latter patterns are referred to as
open-ended patterns. Accordingly, even if you have been injured by a criminal act, you will not have a
RICO claim unless that criminal act is part of a larger pattern of criminal activity.

Statutes of Limitations:

Congress failed to include a statute of limitations when it passed the RICO Act, but the United
States Supreme Court has remedied that oversight and imposed a four-year statute of limitations on
all civil RICO claims. Civil Rico's statute of limitations begins to run when the victim discovers or
reasonably should have discovered its injury. Many people also believe that the statute of limitations is
reset every time a new criminal act is committed - this is not true. Once a victim is aware or should be
aware of its injury, the victim has four years to discover the remaining elements of its claim and bring
suit. A victim cannot sit on its rights and refrain from filing suit in the face of known injuries. That
being said, however, there is several equitable doctrines that may toll or suspend the running of the
statute of limitations. If a defendant fraudulently conceals facts that are essential to the victim's ability
to purse its rights, the running of the statute of limitations may be tolled. In addition, acts of duress,
such as "if you sue me, I'll kill you," may toll the running of the statute of limitations. All tolling
doctrines are based upon whether it is fair, under the circumstances, to bar the victim's claims on the
basis of the running of the statute of limitations. Also, if a defendant engages in a new pattern of
Page 2 of 16

1011612006

Case
2:06-cv-04650-MAM
Document
Filed 11/17/06
Page
3 of to
4 those new
racketing, that causes
new
and independent injuries,
a new5limitations
period may
apply
and independent injuries.

Racketeering activity means:

Any act or threat involving gambling, murder, kidnapping, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion,
dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in
section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and
punishable by imprisonment for more than one year;

Any act which is indictable under a wide variety of specific provisions of title 18 of the United
States Code relating to bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, obscene matter,
obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of
murder-for-hire, etc. Any act which is indictable under title 29, United States Code, section 186
(dealing with restrictions on payments and loans to labor organizations) or section 501 (c)
(relating to embezzlement from union funds),

Any offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (except a case under section
157 of this title), fraud in the sale of securities, or the felonious manufacture, importation,
receiving, concealment, buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled substance or listed
chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), punishable under any
law of the United States, Any act which is indictable under the Currency and Foreign
Transactions Reporting Act,

Any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274 (relating to
bringing in and harboring certain aliens), section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting certain
aliens to enter the United States), or section 278 (relating to importation of alien for immoral
purpose) if the act indictable under such section of such Act was committed for the purpose of
financial gain, or

Any act that is indictable under any provision listed in section 2332b (g)(5)(B); Pattern of
racketeering actlvltv requires at least two acts of racketeering actiVity, one of which occurred
after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years
(excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering
actiVity;
The RICO laws can be alleged in cases where civil lawsuits or criminal charges are brought

against individuals or corporations in retaliation for said individuals or corporations working with law
enforcement, or against individuals or corporations who have sued or filed criminal charges against a
defendant.

Antl-SLAPP (strategic lawsult against public participation) laws can be applied In an attempt to
curb alleged abuses of the legal system by individuals or corporations who utilize the courts as a
weapon to retaliate against whistle blowers, victims, or to silence another's speech. RICO could be
alleged if it can be shown that lawyers and/or their clients conspired and collaborated to concoct
Page 3 of 16

10/1612006

Case 2:06-cv-04650-MAM
5 Filed
11/17/06 Page
4 ofbeen
4 brought
flctttlous legal complaints
solely in retribution Document
and retaliation
for themselves
having
before the courts.

Causes of Action:
1.

DEFENDITS did willfully engage in activities that resulted in the extortion and theft of the
PLAINTIFFS assets and Businesses, business property, stock, and income opportunities.

2.

DEFENDITS did willfully engage in Prosecutorial Misconduct resulting in false imprisonment.

3.

DEFEI\lDITS did willfully engage in Defamation of Character and libel.

4.

DEFENDITS did willfully engage in Providing False Statements to Authorities.

5.

DEFENDITS did willfully engage in Criminal Activities with the intent to Obstruct Justice And
deny PLAINTIFF's Rights to Due Process of Bankruptcy Petition 05-23089; Lancaster Court of
Common Pleas Civil Actions CI-05-03644; CI-06-07376; CI-06-03403; CI-06-03401; CI-06
03349; CI-06-07330; CI-06-04939; CI-06-02271; CI-06-07188; CI-06-06658; CI-06-08490;
and the Federal False Claims Act concerning International Signal & Control, PIc., and the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania 05-2288; CA-05-3689; CA-06
4154; and CA-06-3395.

6.

DEFENDITS did willfUlly engage in Malicious Prosecution.

7.

DEFENDITS did willfully engage in Acts of Mental Duress.

8.

DEFENDITS did willfully engage in Wholesale Discrimination.

9.

DEFENDITS did willfully engage in Officers have a duty to protect individuals from constitutional
violations by fellow officers. Therefore, an officer who witnesses a fellow officer violating an
individual's constitutional rights may be liable to the victim for failing to intervene.
DEFENDITS did willfully engage in using excessive force during certain arrests and

10.

Apprehensions.

The PLAINTIFF requests the Courts to issue an injunction against future acts as described
herein. The PLAINTIFF is under adverse duress to file this COMPLAINT; and will provide the follOWing
(e) a short and plain statement of the claim showinq that the pleader is entitled to relief; (f) a demand
for judgment for the relief to which the plaintiff deems himself entitled; as soon as the PLAINTIFF is
able.
The PLAINTIFF seeks a Trial By Jury and damages in excess of $150,000.00.

Date: October 16, 2006

s'c
Stanle J. Caterbo
220 tone Hill Roa
Conestoga, PA 174516
717-431-8184
717-427-1821 facsimile
amgroupOl@msn.com
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
Page 4 of 16

10/1612006