Josip Heit ordered to attend Texas Apertum fraud hearing
Josip Heit has been ordered to attend an upcoming Texas hearing in person.
In a case consolidation order filed on May 8th, the Texas State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) stated;
Parties and the court reporter are to attend in person along with each of the parties’ counsel.
The order pertains to Josip Heit (right), Apertum Foundation, Dirc Zahlmann, Bruce Hughes and Dennis Loos.
Seeking to avoid entering the US, counsel for the above filed a motion requesting relief from in-person attendance on May 12th.
Respondents Apertum Foundation, Josip Heit, Dirc Zahlmann, Bruce Innes Wylde Hughes, and Dennis Christopher Loos (collectively, “Respondents”), by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully submit this joint motion to the Honorable Administrative Law Judges (“ALJs”) for clarification or, alternatively, for relief from the requirement that Respondents personally appear at the hearing.
Requiring the presence of Respondents at the Hearing, either in person or virtually, would be an undue burden and an unnecessary hardship.
As set forth in the Respondents’ respective Motions for Summary Disposition, each of the Respondents is a foreign person or entity, over whom Petitioner lacks jurisdiction.
Apertum Foundation is a foreign entity that is registered in the Marshall Islands and has no office, employee, agent, property, bank account, or servers in Texas.
Josip Heit and Dennis Christopher Loos are citizens of Germany and residents of the United Arab Emirates (“UAE”).
Dirc Zahlmann is a citizen of Germany and a resident of Germany and the UAE. And Bruce Innes Wylde Hughes is a citizen of South Africa and a resident of the UAE.
On May 13th the SOAH issued an order denying the motion;
The June 2-4, 2025 hearing is in person.
Reasoning cited by the court was Heit and the Apertum Foundation respondents specifically “request[ing] an in person hearing” in a previous filing.
The court’s order sets the stage for Heit and fellow Apertum respondents to enter the US. BehindMLM has previously reported on ongoing federal investigations into Heit.
It’s also unclear whether Heit’s prior conviction in Luxembourg, as Josip Curcic, will impact him obtaining a US visa.
Heit is reported to have been sentenced to prison on financial fraud charges sometime in the 2000s.
Heit was released from prison in Luxembourg in 2012. Sometime after release Heit changed his surname from Curcic.
It should be noted that, irrespective of whether Heit entering the US triggers a response from US authorities, ongoing investigations are assumed to still be active.
In filings related to the Texas Apertum fraud case, Heit’s attorneys have consistently maintained
Respondents have never intentionally reached into Texas in connection with the offer or sale of APTM, and, in fact, have publicly represented that their products are not available to residents of the United States.
As of April 2025, SimilarWeb tracked the US as the top source of traffic to Apertum Foundation’s website (46%). During the same month, the US was the second largest source of traffic to DAO1’s website (27%, up 4744% month on month).
As per SOAH’s May 13th order, the Apertum Foundation fraud case is scheduled for hearing over June 2nd to 4th.
A related hearing on alleged GSB fraud pertaining to GSPartners remains scheduled for August 11th.
Update 23rd May 2025 – The Texas Apertum fraud hearing has been rescheduled for October 20th, 2025.
Hat tip to the BehindMLM reader who sent in the relevant filings.
That Residency in the UAE is quite a few bucks. Better get ready to give it up Brucey.
I wonder how having already been imprisoned for financial fraud and travelling to the US to attend a financial fraud hearing as a defendant will go down with US immigration?
Given ICE’s current detention spree – risky move.
As a German citizen, he would be legible to enter having done an ESTA application, but he would likely be asked about any crimes involving moral turpitude. The alleged conviction in luxembourg may be a problem (the allegations won’t help either).
He could buy the Trump Gold card maybe? It’s currently just north of 4 mil APTM. I hear that they take anyone, even Russian oligarchs.
I wonder how Heit’s attorneys feel at having pushed for a request to deny in-person hearings when Heit & Co pushed for in-person hearings in the past? Probably very silly.
I also love the quote that forcing them to travel to the US “would be an undue burden and an unnecessary hardship.”
Heit & Co recently went to South East Asia whereby they posted stories to Instagram glugging champagne in business class on Emirates. This story of undue burden and hardship is really very sad.
I really hope this circus attempts to go to their hearing in-person.
I was thinking more…
refund request
You’re commenting on an article dear. That’s now how refund requests work.
Comeone Oz, cough up and refund the nice woman meanie!
The other thing that makes their apparent inability to travel ridiculous is all their blather about their current global roadshow and Dennis being so run off his feet travelling all over for that, evidenced in their last global call: youtube.com/watch?v=agRtKD1rjJ4&feature=youtu.be
I think it is great the order was made for him to appear which he, and the others initially requested, at this hearing.
Having said that, does anyone really believe he, and the others are really going to show due to this order? Not a snowball chance in hell they show up.
They never intended to show up for this hearing. It was all words. They didn’t think the US authorities would take them up on their claim they requested to appear before the court. They fear if they come they won’t be going back.
This whole refund was a red herring and a ruse to keep the faithful in line, and give everyone false hope they would get their money back. They also saw what happened to Konstantin.
I too loved the “to come would be an undue burden and unnecessary hardship” claim. The only burden and hardship was they wouldn’t be going back for them.
@Oz – is there any way to read the filings you have seen?
Two things.
Yes, Oz. Scott is absolutely guilty. He thoroughly deserves everything he is facing. However, if he was procedurally biased against, he deserves a fair whack.
It upsets all of us that Cosby, OJ, Claus von Bülow, Albert Speer, etc, got away with it because the system is designed that way, rather ten guilty guys walk then one innocent, whatever… If a prosecution is flawed, it’s fatally flawed.
Edmington. Did it ever occur to you that the London office actually gave the DoJ just about everything it has?
It wasn’t necessary for any of us to go the US. The DANY set up an office in CoLP’s building and seconded a team over. The same FBI guys who pretended to be OC promoters in LV were suddenly in England with different names and recording everything.
You’ve contributed what to this exactly?
It’s a bit of a hassle. You’ll need to create a SOAH account, look up the case and then pay fees.
He wasn’t. The appeals court examined and dismissed Scott’s arguments.
These filings are publicly published, just need to register on re:SearchTX (research.txcourts.gov/) with an address in the USA, and I think access may be restricted to USA IP addresses as well.
Then search for the docket number (312-25-16274).
While slowly going through the filings, some interesting stuff has come up. Lawyers have used the reasoning that due to there not being direct flights from Dubai to Austin, Heit and co would have to travel 18+ hours a way.
If the hearings have 6 hours of testimony over the 3 days, this would mean that their travel time is double the hearing time.
A second argument made to try and get them out of being in camera via video link is due to timezone differences. Apparently, and I shit you not, its unreasonable and creates undue hardship for them to have to attend the hearings after a full business day (yep, thats what they have said) and stay up until after midnight (2am to be exact) for 3 days.
The lawyers for Heit and co also raised that Visa’s may be a problem (even though Bruce is the only one that would need to go through the VISA process, as Heit/Zahlmann/Loos are German citizens can get a ESTA via the “VISA Waiver System”. According to ESTA, it could take between a few mins to 72 hours and costs 21USD.
Lawyers argued that it takes weeks, involves submissions and interviews and money (I dont think they take APTM either). Judges obviously didnt care.
It also seems like the June 2 – 4 hearing may not happen. The parties were able to join the matters together (it seems like they were separated). In addition, the TSSB have added another 1000 exhibits to their 500-600 initial exhibits.
If I read between the lines, I dont think they TSSB can get through all exhibits with all parties and give sufficient time for the defence to happen as well. They had asked for a continuation to Nov or Dec (seemingly after having spoken to APTMS lawyers, who said they were busy during the summer).
APTM has opposed this (as they want to clear their names urgently). They are offering an extra day or two in the same or following week, but don’t agree with moving it six months later as the C&D affects reputations.
Their argument is that TSSB have “shot first and aimed second” and are alluding that the push for continuation is due to TSSB not having the evidence to prosecute their claims.
Per the public fillings, the zoom details were given for Jun 2-4. @Oz I dont know if you will allow me to post it here for interested parties?
To join by computer or smart device, go to soah-texas.zoomgov.com
Meeting ID: 160 972 3014
Video Passcode: SSB274
It appears as if there is also a pretrial hearing that cant be attended on the 27th of May at 10am texas time.
To join by computer or smart device, go to
soah-texas.zoomgov.com and enter:
Meeting ID: 160 972 3014
Video Passcode: SSB274
On an unrelated note, I have started a new altcoin called “popcoin”. It will go live on June 2 until June 4. You can buy from local exchanges (Wallmart, Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Spar etc). You will mine it with new web3 technology called “Microwave bot”.
Top tier package includes “Meta-flavours” (butter, salt, cheese). Im setting the burn rate to 100% by June 4, so this is very exclusive. I havent applied the Howey test to this, please dont tell Jo Rotunda.
I have questions: If you head over to coinmarketcap and look at the stats for APTM, you will see that currently the circulating supply is 3.89m APTM and total supply is 6.74m. The white paper discloses that The Apertum foundation has pre-minted 100 mil coins. Shouldnt this reflect on the total supply?
Section 5 of the whitepaper says:
“The Foundation will have a total of 100 million pre-minted APTM, for marketing, advertising, development and research purposes, constituting 4.76% of total supply.”
— Apertum Whitepaper, Section 5.0, Page 9
Note – nothing about legal fee’s re the use of this pre-minted money.
Later in Section 5.1, it states:
“Governance is decentralized, allowing APTM token holders to vote on protocol changes, resource allocation, and dispute resolution.”
If you google what these lawyers charge (or cheat and use ChatGPT) you may fall off your chair. It could exceed 3 mil USD depending on how complex the case is. If the legal costs as much as that, that would be around 70% of APTMS reported value (total reported supply X price per coin)
Has this been disclosed to APTM holders and put forward as a vote?
As The Apertum foundation holds 100m pre-minted coin, I assume that they have over 90% of the voting power, but this shouldnt exclude them from their own Whitepapers claim that governance is decentralised and holders of the coin vote on resource allocation and dispute resolution.
If it hasnt been disclosed and voted on, then how is APTM decentralised?
Is APTM paying for Heit, Loos, Zahlman and Hughes’s fee’s as well? Would this not an ethical issue that should be disclosed?
If the 100 mil is being disposed of to pay for legal fee’s, shouldnt it be in the circulating supply then? Should there not be a record of it somewhere thats traceable?
Should we not be seeing large amounts being exchanged into FIAT (to be paid to lawyers?)
Or did the Apertum foundation have money before they started? Where did that come from?
If proceeds are from an illegal security as per TSSB’s claims, can the funds be used to pay attorneys for defence?
If I buy 1 APTM, shouldnt I recieve all information regarding money spend by the foundation on all legal matters?
So many questions, and the more you ask, the more questions you get.
Hearing on the TSSB Vs GSB/GSPartners matter has been moved to Oct 20-24 as per the SOAH’s ruling on May 16. It looks like it was unopposed by the TSSB.
@Concerned
I was going to post the Zoom details closer to the haring.
Popcorn delayed. *sad fraud noises*
Might not be delayed yet…
It was actually the TSSB who filed for the continuance, suggesting that the volume of evidence could necessitate a 5 day hearing, rather than the planned 3 days:
“The addition of three more Respondents, additional witnesses and additional evidence, that will be uploaded in accordance with the current May 21st deadline, will require more than three days for the hearing.”
Josip Heit et al. repsponded, opposing the continuance, suggesting that it shouldn’t take that long.
No sign of any additional material from the TSSB (though I expect that might not be public?) or any decision from the SOAH yet, but 312-25-16274 remains on the SOAH docket for the first week of June, with a pre-hearing conference set for the 27th.
Cool, thanks for the update. Looking forward to more news.
@MD – I suspect the additional evidence is filed under seal. In the last challenge to TSSB’s continuation, TSSB’s witness list was included. Looks like TSSB also have a texas resident who will be testifying.
Heit & Co have asked for a continuation twice already on this matter, and at least once on the other. I dont understand the argument Heit makes about the time delayed and the repuational damage, as he should have factored that in to his prior 2 continuation requests then.
The TSSB used a similar arguement that Heit now uses (IE that delays would cause undue harm to texans), and were denied their challenge. Based upon this, I think it’s likely that the Judges may grant The TSSB the continuation.
Tactically the APTM lawyers might be trying to push for it to happen sooner so that Heit and co can come up with excuses about not being there (they have already argued about how long the VISA process would be). They may also be trying to pressure TSSB to condense their case hoping they will make missteps.
I also have to wonder if the TSSB are not trying to push the timeline so that the GSP matter is finalised first as there is a bit of overlap that may help them with this matter. They may also be trying to play for time to see how/if the settlements are concluded.
I also wonder how much this costs. QE are not a cheap firm, and these constant filings and continuations cannot come cheap (never mind all the collabs between different lawyers). Last week alone they had filed 4 submissions (this is not including the other filings under seal – witness lists, evidence etc).
On the GSP Matter, Alixpartners apparently charge between 3-10% of the total amount refunded as fees. Whilst they are objective, they are also supposed to act as fiduciaries in favour of the clients.
If they experience any issues with the GSP side, they are likely already reporting it to the states involved. The TSSB may be aware of this as well being part of the working group.
The coin itself seems to be on major downward trend, losing half its value in one month. If the TSSB get there continuation granted, there may be no Apertum Foundation come nov/dec.
Bruce is posting motivational posts with stock motivational music to try and calm the storm.
Is the pre-hearing conference set for today still happening?
It’s still showing on the general docket hearing schedule. Also the 6th of June hearing is also still showing.
Continuation granted to Nov 3-7. A second earlier option was provided for on aug 11-15. Should parties want the earlier date, they will need to notify the court by jun 6.
I am unsure if prehearing issues are dealt with on June 2?
Both sides allotted 15 hours each to account for 6 hours of testimony over the 5 days.
The judges have pointed out that in the initial continuation request, Apertum had argued that:
“no emergency requiring an immediate
hearing” and that Mr. Heit was in the middle of a settlement claims process with
42 regulatory entities”
Apertum also had requested later dates:
“Apertum Foundation and Mr. Heit urged that
this hearing take place “on October 20-24, 2025, October 27-31, 2025, [or]
November 3-7, 2025.”
In the challenge to this continuation, Apertum obviously argued the opposite. The judges have essentially given them the dates they had asked for initially.
In a separate filing, Quinn Emanuel have admitted another attorney.
November? Oh well we still have August or is everything clobbered together now for Nov?
I guess so long as Heit is required to attend, popcorn will eventually flow.
TSSB V GSB – Order granting continuance filed on May 16 : Continued to Oct 20-24 (4 days). Parties to file their proposed agreed scheduling order by May 28. We will likely see this in a few days once the judge has signed. I see that the prior scheduling orders also require parties to be there in person (oddly no push back from Josip – as it would likely be only him present with attorneys).
New filing dropped:
Apertum lawyers have requested a reconsideration of the continuance. They are pushing for the June 2 hearing to take place.
Reasons provided are:
The judges order granting continuation did address this, as it had pointed out that Apertum had requested continuation twice already and provided dates (one of those dates was the exact date range in November that the judges continued the hearing to).
The ruling they are arguing refers to the 10 days statutory limit which protects the respondents from reputational harm by providing a hearing within 10 days of the C&D. Seeing that Apertum had continued this, I would think they agreed to waiving this?
I don’t see how they get this continuation. June 2 is Monday. I doubt anyone has their visas yet (so maybe this is all to avoid them physically being there)?
Second theory – the other dates they are proposing (as extensions to the June 2-4 hearing) all fall before the GSB hearing.
Part of their dispute on the evidence earlier this week was that a considerable amount was attributed to GSB.
I wonder if this scheduling may be more favorable to them?
I remember seeing something about Heit’s attorneys crying about them not being available over summer because vacations.
That’s fair enough but you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Guess we’ll see what the Judge thinks.
Don’t see June 2nd happening on such short notice. Especially after Heit’s side cried about the original April hearing being too short notice.
Third theory – the hearing will be a full litigation of the matter (TSSB will have to prove their case as opposed to defending their order).
The TSSB recently added 1000+ extra exhibits into evidence, and it appears as if they can now add more with the hearing continued to later this year. Their job is to protect Texans against financial harm.
I wonder if the continuation complicates DAO1 lite or any other future plans for Heit and Co ?
@Oz – in one of the filings. Heit’s lawyers even cite Jewish holidays when providing potential hearing dates. It’s a well known fact that reputational damage doesn’t happen over Jewish holidays.
Update – Judges have denied the motion for reconsideration. The later date stands, and APTM are reminded that a second earlier option in August was also provided to both sides (I assume both sides have to agree for the earlier date to happen)
Parties are ordered to provide dates in June or July for a prehearing.
@Oz, I can write a short summary here, but as the judges lay into them a bit, it may make for a nice update article? I can send you the filings by email if you need them?
Yes please. Remember I don’t have direct access to the filings.
One thing I’m still not 100% on, is the GSB hearing is still on for August?
GSB hearing is now oct 20 – 24.
There was an updated filing that has become available providing the full scheduling order.
I have sent you all the documents for both matters.
Thanks. Got a bit of news to cover today.