Under the terms of a Settlement Contract between PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (PGS) and Steven D Kalavity dated 5 December 2013 (the “Settlement Contract”), PGS agreed not publish or cause to be published any statement (whether of fact or opinion) which directly or indirectly disparages, is harmful to or damages the reputation or standing of the Employee.
Settlement Contract Confidentiality Clause 9.7:
9.7 In consideration for the obligations entered into by the Employee in this Clause 9, the Company agrees to make reasonable efforts:
Settlement Agreement Confidentiality Clause 9.7
(a) neither to make nor publish, nor cause to be made or published, to anyone in any circumstances any statement (whether of fact or opinion) which directly or indirectly disparages, is harmful to or damages the reputation or standing of the Employee (save as may be required by law or regulation), nor to represent the Employee as an authorized agent/employee or otherwise of the Company once his employment has ended, and
(b) to keep the existence and terms of this Agreement and the circumstances giving rise to its making confidential and not to disclose, communicate or otherwise make public these terms to any third party save and except as required by law or regulation, or in confidence to its professional advisers.
PGS has also breached the Settlement Contract Confidentiality clause 9.6 through misrepresenting protected public disclosure as criminal defamation in Thailand. PGS has not followed policy or whistleblower procedures. PGS has illegally retaliated against a whistleblower through these intentional breaches.
Settlement Contract Confidentiality Clause 9.6:
9.6 Nothing in this Clause 9 shall prevent the Employee from disclosing information which he is entitled to disclose under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, provided that the disclosure is made in accordance with the provisions of that Act and the Employee has complied with the Company’s policy from time to time regarding such disclosure.
Settlement Contract Confidentiality Clause 9.6
The Settlement Contract was referenced to be legally affirmed and valid by PGS within the 16 July 2018 response to the SDK submitted subject access request (2018 SAR Response).
Thai Criminal case number 2551/2561 claim document (“PGS Thai Claim”) was signed and dated by PGS directors: Rune Olav Pedersen, Gottfred Langseth, and Christin Steen-Nilsen 10 July 2018. PGS directors also affirmed the Settlement Contract.
Therefore, the PGS Thai Claim constitutes a material breach of the Settlement Contract by PGS. The PGS Thai Claim is not a valid legal instrument.
SDK is demanding the withdrawal of all claims and contracts that are a derivative of PGS ASA breaching the Settlement Contract.
John Francas / PGS ASA have never cited a breach in the Confidentiality clauses of SDK – PGS Exploration (UK) Limited contracts (2010 & 2013) prohibiting disparaging parties. However, SDK cites several PGS ASA breaches in these agreements!
What’s wrong with English contracts governed by the laws of England, PGS?
NORWAY’S PGS ASA EXPORTS CORRUPTION and BRIBES DUENSING – KIPPEN in THAILAND because PGS ASA has NO Evidence of DEFAMATION in UK
USA FEDERAL LAW VIOLATIONS – RACKETEERING INFLUENCED and CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT (RICO)
DON’T LET NORWAY’S PGS ASA EXPORT CORRUPTION to THAILAND
PGS ASA and Duensing – Kippen Broke USA Federal Law and Illegally Copied SDK Passport to Stalk and Harass SDK and form an ILLEGAL FALSE CLAIM. PGS ASA want SDK to STOP Legally Protected WHISTLEBLOWING. PGS ASA wants SDK to Destroy Evidence of PGS ASA CRIMES!
The Thai Litigation Criminal Claim Leading to the Compromise Agreement Included Reference to an Unanswered “Open Letter to the PGS ASA Board of Directors.” The PGS ASA General Counsel, Lars Mysen, signed-off on the Thai Claim (s). PGS ASA Board of Directors (of a Norwegian Company) are the Plaintiffs
PGS ASA/John Francas,
This is acknowledgement that I received, by e-mail, the Notice of breach of Compromise Agreement, dated 23 April 2020, (the “Thailand Extortion”)
The Thailand Extortiondoes not reference a physical address for legal correspondence, but only an e-mail address (Clause 3). PGS ASA / John Francas were notified 3 July 2019 that I was not residing in Thailand. Why has PGS ASA delivered firm copies of legal document to an address in Thailand?
Would you please send me notarized copies of the referenced Thailand Extortion that Steven D. Kalavity signed?
Also, please send details and legal credentials of the agent(s) representing PGS Exploration (UK) Limited for PGS ASAs claims in the USA/Texas.
Please send me acknowledgement and responses to the e-mails sent to PGS ASA agents following the delivery of the summons (13 September 2018) and the signing of the Thailand Extortion([11 November 2018 “Compromise Agreement”]).
As you know, I was employed by PGS ASAs USA subsidiary in Houston, Texas.
I would also like to receive copies of the employment contracts signed between myself and PGS Exploration (UK) Limited in 2010 and 2013 (advised by legal firm Watson, Farley & Williams (the “UK Legal Contracts“).
What is the status of the UK Legal Contractsin context to the Thailand Extortion? Please also send me confirmation of PGS ASA employee, Gareth Jones, legal agency (employer) from 2013 – 2020?
Please send a copy of my PGS ASA personnel file, which is the predicate behind all my online publications.
The Thailand Extortionis being prosecuted on behalf of PGS Exploration (UK) Limited directors, Gottfred Langseth, Christin Steen-Nilsen, and Rune Olav Pedersen. Please correct me if I am wrong, but PGS ASAs USA subsidiary, Petroleum Geo-Services, Inc., Houston, Texas has directors Gottfred Langseth, Christin Steen-Nilsen and Jon Erik Reinhardsen, who have legal fiduciary responsibilities for PGS ASA USA matters?
Similarly, please send credentials and authorization of PGS Exploration (UK) Limited agent Duensing – Kippen to draft legal agreements for adjudication in the Federal Courts of Harris County, Texas, USA.
PGS ASA has not yet acknowledged my submitted [subject access request] 15 April 2020. Please do so, and I would also like PGS ASA to respond to subsequent e-mail correspondence, especially the e-mail sent 22 April 2020.
Please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail, as well.
More PGA ASA Blackmail / Extortion ….
Dear Mr Kalavity
Notice of Breach of Compromise Agreement
Under the terms of a Compromise Agreement of Criminal Case between PGS Exploration (UK) (PGS) Limited and Steven D Kalavity dated 9 November 2011 (the “Compromise Agreement”), you agreed that you would not publish or cause to be published the Publication or similar content on any website, social media platform or any other digital or physical media including, without limitation, by email.
You breached the Compromise Agreement in 2018 and you received notices to that effect pursuant to Clause 3 of the Compromise Agreement on 30 April 2019 and 7 May 2019 instructing you to remove or amend such material. You did not do so. As such PGS are taking civil and criminal proceedings against you in Thailand, as we are entitled to do under Clause 6 of the Compromise Agreement. Note that in the event PGS prevail in such proceedings against you, you will be liable to PGS on an indemnity basis for PGS’s full legal costs. This will be enforced against you as a debt.
You have published the Publication and more similar content in breach of Clause 2 of the Compromise agreement on your websites www.marineseismicsurvey.com and www.nopgs.org.
This email constitutes notice in accordance with our obligations under Clause 3 of the Compromise Agreement. PGS hereby notifies you in accordance with Clause 3 of the Compromise Agreement that publishing of the material on www.marineseismicsurvey.com and www.nopgs.org is a breach of Clause 2 of the Compromise Agreement and must be removed from those websites. You have three (3) days to comply with this notice by removing the material or amending it so that it does not mention PGS or its Affiliates or employees.
Under Clause 4 of the Compromise Agreement you agreed to pay a penalty of USD $50,000, which shall constitute a debt from you to PGS. In the event that the material has not been removed by 2 pm UK time on 26 April 2020, PGS shall without further notice to you instigate debt recovery proceedings against you for all penalty sums due to PGS occasioned by this and your previous violations of Clause 2. Such proceedings may include bankruptcy proceedings available to PGS under relevant applicable laws.
In addition to proceedings against you in Thailand, we reserve the right to issue further proceedings against you in Texas for breach of contract in accordance with our rights under Clause 6 of the Compromise Agreement. Note that in the event PGS prevail in these further proceedings against you, you will be liable to PGS on an indemnity basis for PGS’s full legal costs. This, again, will be enforced against you as a debt.
I submitted a subject access request 15 April 2020 that has not been acknowledged.
Could PGS ASA please acknowledge?
I would like to reference the Response to Access Request Dated 11 June 2018 (the “Access Request”) dated 16 July 2018 and signed by John Francas, Head of Legal, UK, Africa, and Middle East for PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (the “Fraudulent Letter”)
It seems that PGS intentionally provided material misrepresentations and also withheld material information from the data subject in this Fraudulent Letter. Please clarify if the data subject has misinterpreted the Fraudulent Letter.
The Fraudulent Letterstates:
You should also note that under the terms of the settlement agreement between you and PGS dated 5 December 2013 (the “Settlement Agreement”) you agreed not to further pursue your grievance or any analogous or substantially similar or other grievance against PGS and that PGS, nor any other company in the PGS group, shall have any further obligation to you in respect to such grievances.
The majority of my online publications do not repeat the issues of the 20 September 2013 grievance (the “grievance”) which is referenced in the Settlement Agreement. I would appreciate it if PGS ASA would specifically reference the contents of the grievance, to avoid ambiguity, since the grievance is quite long. However, as PGS ASA can reference from the copy of the grievance being processed by PGS, the Form of Grievance introduction states:
In response to the fore-mentioned meeting and the Investigation for Possible Implementation of a Performance Improvement Plan, I am initiating the grievance procedure due to my belief that PGS Contract Sales – Africa has breached in practice and principle UK labor laws, PGS Core Values, PGS UK Personnel Handbook practices, as well as established best practices as presented through PGS contracted training and development courses.
It is my contention that Contract Sales – Africa work environment is unsafe/unhealthy.
Further, the Contract Sales – Africa Manager has breached his trust and authority through exercising negative behaviors consistent with workplace bullying, harassment, discrimination, defamation and negligence.
The topic of most of my online publications have been in regard to the documents and processes which supported and led to my signing the Settlement Agreement. The grievancepresented to PGS ASA executive management was protected disclosures, or whistleblowing, according to the UK Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA):
In this Act a “protected disclosure” means a qualifying disclosure (as defined by section 43B) which is made by a worker in accordance with any of sections 43C to 43H.
43B Disclosures qualifying for protection.
(1) In this Part a “qualifying disclosure” means any disclosure of information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker making the disclosure, tends to show one or more of the following—
(a)that a criminal offence has been committed, is being committed or is likely to be committed,
(b)that a person has failed, is failing or is likely to fail to comply with any legal obligation to which he is subject,
(c)that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, is occurring or is likely to occur,
(d)that the health or safety of any individual has been, is being or is likely to be endangered,
(e)that the environment has been, is being or is likely to be damaged, or
(f)that information tending to show any matter falling within any one of the preceding paragraphs has been, is being or is likely to be deliberately concealed.
In October 2014, I submitted a subject access request (the “2014 SAR”) so that I could obtain the personal data that PGS was processing in my name. Firm copies of e-mail records and the contents of my PGS professional personnel file (“personnel file”) was mailed from Weybridge, England to my residence (at the time) in Houston, Texas, USA.
It was immediately recognized by me, the data subject, that several of the documents within the personnel file being processed are defamatory forgeries that are not legally verifiable. No one can verify them as authentic, because the documents are not signed by the data subject nor supported by accompanying documentation evidence. (I challenge PGS data processor, John Francas, a lawyer, to authenticate to the standard required by a court of law (England) the documents that were delivered to me. Also, the dates on the documents indicate that they were processed to support the Settlement Agreement. In other words, illegal documents were used to process the Settlement Agreement. This revelation of more (alleged) criminal activity has been the topic of most of the queries e-mailed to PGS agents and content which I have published online. This content is also protected disclosure, but not the same protected disclosure that was revealed within the grievance.
PGS references the 2014 SAR within the Fraudulent Letter:
We [PGS] have determined that applicable law allows us to deny your request on the basis that processing of your personal data, if any, that may have occurred since your previous request on 10 October 2014 (the “2014 SAR”) would have only been performed in order to seek privileged legal advice in respect to your various direct and indirect communication with or about PGS and/or its employees. Accordingly, we are denying your request under the Data Protection Act 2018, Schedule 2, paragraph 19(a).
In any event, we consider your request manifestly unfounded or excessive under GDPR Article 12(5)(b). In particular they are repetitive given the 2014 SAR and subsequent persistent requests in email correspondence in December 2014 and repeated requests in June 2018 in the days following the Access Request. It is our view that PGS provided you with a substantive response and documents in respect to the 2014 SAR.
It should be emphasized, again, that my repeated requests are a derivative of PGS ignoring my direct or indirect communications with or about PGS and/or its employees. PGS has had multiple opportunities to answer simple questions, but irresponsibly refuse to do so, as with the Fraudulent Letter that answers nothing and instead makes continued online publications and queries inevitable.
Of course, PGS is aware that I rejected their citing Data Protection Act 2018, Schedule 2, paragraph 19(a) as a reason for denying a responsible response to my several queries stemming from the 2014 SAR response. If PGS actually read and acknowledged the contents of my online publications, PGS would understand that I believe that PGS continues to utter forged defamatory documents (criminal behavior) as my personal data.
Data Protection Act 2018, Schedule 2, paragraph 19(a) – Legal Professional Privilege
19 The listed GDPR provisions do not apply to personal data that consists of –
Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege or, in Scotland, confidentiality of communications, could be maintained in legal proceedings.
One of the exceptions to the attorney-client privilege is the crime-fraud exception. This exception applies when communications are made in the furtherance of a crime or fraud. In other words, the attorney-client privilege is not a shield to be used by either the attorney or the client to pursue or cover up criminal activity, including acts contributing to the obstruction or perversion of justice.
With regard to the 2014 SAR, during November – December 2014, following the receipt of the data received from PGS, I wrote several e-mails stating my concerns about the integrity of the data that PGS processed in my name. On 22 December 2014, PGS sent a response letter to me by post and e-mail (the “Extortion Letter”):
Data Processing Queries – PGS Exploration (UK) Limited (the “Company”)
I am writing further your e-mail correspondence of 5, 6, and 20 December 2014.
Please be aware that, to the extent that your queries and comments relate to issues which were not raised in your grievance of 20 September 2013, the Company is willing to take reasonable and proportionate steps to accommodate your requests.
Instead, a copy of your email of 5 December has been placed on your personnel file (and is held also in our email and document database), and the points you have raised about the data we hold are accordingly held together with your other personal data. We regard this as a satisfactory and proportionate approach to our obligation to ensure that personal data held about you is accurate.
The only point which we think might possibly not be clear from that material would be the identities of those who have had access to your hard copy personnel file. The people who have had access to the hard copy personnel file (a copy of which was provided to you) are myself, Laura Haswell, Gareth Jones, Anna Stokle and Simon Cather, all in our capacities as your management and HR employees of the Company.
You should also be aware that, to the extent the Company incurs losses by reason of further breaches of your agreement not to pursue matters raised in that grievance, its rights are reserved to (among other remedies) bring damages claims against you for breach of contract in respect of those losses.
The Extortion Letter similarly misrepresented my concerns with the content received from the 2014 SAR as relating to the issues raised within the grievance. I was now raising issues with how the grievance was settled. The grievance itself claimed that PGS ASA was breaking the law and in breach of employment contract and PGS (UK) policy, which was whistleblowing. Upon receiving the copies of data being processed in my name by PGS, I now believed that defamatory forged documents were illegally used to process the Settlement Agreement. PGS stating that they would process the Dispute E-mail“as a satisfactory and proportionate approach to our obligation to ensure that personal data held about you is accurate” is acknowledging that inaccurate data was processed to support the Settlement Agreement. However, I did not regard that simply processing correct data after weaponized fraudulent data was used to affect a termination under false pretenses was a proportionate remedy. Not only did PGS process inaccurate (defamatory) data, but so did all the lawyers involved in using the inaccurate data. This implied a criminal conspiracy to defraud a whistleblower and terminate him illegally with a fraudulent Settlement Agreement. PGS’ solution was neither acceptable norproportionate to the data subject and victim of crimes!
I did not come to these conclusions immediately after receiving the 2014 SAR response contents. However, I did immediately believe that PGS was in breach of the Settlement Agreement. However, I hadn’t yet imagined the broader conspiracy and what it implied. The binding nature of settlement agreements made legal redress problematic. On 3 July 2015, I published on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform, An American, the UK Data Protection Act, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) and the Tyranny of “Accurate Data”. PGS never invoked the Confidentiality clauses within the Settlement Agreement prohibiting the publication of disparaging content. I believed that this was protected public disclosure. On 24 August 2015, I submitted a report to UK ActionFraud (police). I continued to publish on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform. On 6 September 2015, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen Should Resign was published on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform, followed on 20 September 2015 with, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen Should Resign II, that actually presented documented evidence that PGS was uttering forged documents as my personal data. (These articles now are published on marineseismicsurvey.com.) Again, PGS didn’t invoke the Confidentiality clauses of disparaging content which I was trying to provoke. In October 2015, I moved from the USA to Thailand.
I continued to publish protected disclosure on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform. On 20 April 2016, I submitted another SAR (the “2016 SAR”) to the PGS Compliance Hotline composed of PGS General Counsel, Rune Olav Pedersen; PGS Senior Vice President Global Human Resources, Terje Bjølseth; and Vice President Compliance and Internal Audit, Silke Hitschkes. My intentions for notifying the PGS Compliance Hotline were to formally present my concerns regarding the integrity of the data PGS was processing in my name so that it would be processed, but also to provoke a response to my publications on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform. I especially wanted PGS compliance comment confirm the contents published within the 20 September 2015 article where evidence to support my allegations was presented. PGS issued the following statement on 20 May 2016:
PGS has followed up your complaint through the Compliance Hotline in accordance with our procedures. No deviations from PGS’ procedures or guidelines were uncovered and none of the documents placed in your employee folder was found to contain false or misleading information about you. No evidence found indicate that you were defrauded. The case dealing with your complaint is hereby closed.
PGS provided no evidence nor an investigation report to back-up this ridiculous statement. PGS also did not reference nor comment on any of the content posted on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform, the Extortion Letter, nor referenced the Dispute E-mail. On 24 May 2016, I published a response to the PGS Hotline in the form of a blog post,The Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) Ambush Meeting and the Definition of Fraud. The title accuses PGS of criminal behavior. PGS refused to address simple concerns and questions. I continued to post articles on the LinkedIn™ Pulse platform, post queries in the PGS’ LinkedIn™comment space, as well as send e-mails to PGS Compliance Team members. In August 2016, I was restricted from LinkedIn™. PGS had complained that I defamed them. PGS irresponsible misrepresentation of protected disclosure with defamation. PGS never invoked the contractual non-disparagement clauses of the Settlement Agreement. I always considered my published content as protected public disclosure and rejected PGS’ claim that the publications were “defamation.” Further, many of the publications are identified as “whistleblowing.” Regardless, in-house counsel for a company should understand what is legally considered protected public disclosure. The Settlement Agreement is governed by the laws of England, hence PIDA is referenced.
Copies of the e-mails sent to PGS Compliance Hotline from April – September 2016 were intentionally provided to PGS with the 2018 SAR. The Fraudulent Letterintentionally omits reference to 2016 SAR. Retaliating against whistleblowing, most notably through acts contributing to the obstruction or perversion of justice, is what PGS has done consistently since forming the Settlement Agreement. There was something even more sinister and egregious withheld from the PGS’ 2018 SAR response. On 13 September 2018, PGS delivered a court summons for a criminal defamation claim while I was traveling outside Thailand to/in the USA. The summons was in the Thai language. The summons was to address a criminal defamation complaint. PGS had never once commented on any content that I had published prior Thai law firm, Duensing – Kippen delivering the summons on behalf of PGS. Duensing – Kippen delivered the firm copies of the summons and claims to the address of my wife and family where I stayed. I never had provided either my e-mail address or physical address to Duensing – Kippen. I had to rush back to Thailand and see what was distressing my family. PGS violated GDPR and transferred my personal data outside the EEA to Thailand law firm Duensing – Kippen without my consent. This included a copy of my USA passport, which is also a crime under USA Federal law.
My personal data had been provided to PGS for the explicit purpose of identification to process the 2018 SAR. The claim was prepared by PGS 10 July 2018. The 2018 SAR response is dated 16 July 2018. PGS had acknowledged receipt of the 2018 SAR on 18 June 2018. PGS had already processed my personal data, likely illegally, and did not disclose this within their 2018 SAR response. Further, PGS illegally stalked my travels using the illegally obtained personal data. PGS illegally provided my USA passport data to Duensing – Kippen, who also illegally copied my USA passport without my consent to advance a fraud. The summons was received by me in the USA, which again is USA Federal Wire Fraud. I am also convinced this entire organized crime enterprise facilitated by PGS violates the USA Racketeering Influence and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO), and will advance this to the extent which I am capable. PGS has perverted the course of justice through denying me due process facilitated through the bribery of corrupt lawyers. When I returned to Thailand, I had to confront these allegations with very little time to consider and prepare. Nevertheless, I e-mailed several e-mails to PGS asking so many questions. Many of these e-mails were written from the USA, as well.
I want PGS to stop their perverting the course of justice and finally address the issues and questions which have been asked since the fraud initiated whilst in Weybridge, England June 2013. I am demanding that PGS provide me with the purported Thailand arrest warrants that they sponsored through Duensing – Kippen. I also want all of the original data supporting the claims processed in England prior to their translation into the Thai language. There is no way that PGS could process a legal claim of defamation without authenticating the data and processes that created the contents of my professional personnel file. Also, any legal claim would need to be composed of the full-body of publications that were published when the claim was formed, including articles that had been delivered to PGS Compliance from April – September 2016. Finally, most of my publications were published on nopgs.com. This site was taken down in December 2018 and evidence destroyed while Kingdom of Thailand and USA Federal litigation was pending, per the signed 11 November 2018 Duensing – Kippen agreement. PGS and Duensing – Kippen need to explain what happened to nopgs.com?
PGS ASA Refuse to even Acknowledge a General Data Protection Requirement (GDPR) Subject Access Request (SAR). Personal Data Integrity is a Human Right that PGS ASA and Equinor Violate Daily.
Silence is Consent
Norway’s Whistleblower Protection Laws are Worthless if the Country Remains a Major Exporter of Corruption Misusing Oil Revenue to Bribe and Protect the Entitled Corporate Executive Class while Depriving the Working Class Globally and Creating an Impoverished Underclass. Corrupt Corporate Boards of Directors and Executives are allowed to not Invoke Contractual Confidentiality non-Disparagement Clauses that Protect Brand Reputation and Enhance Value. Their Silence is a Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Arrogance of the Self-Entitled who are allowed to Reside Above the law, Free from Justice and Exempted from Due Process. It’s a Travesty and Norwegians and all People Should Revolt against these Charlatan’s and Boycott Equinor, Telenor, and PGS ASA! Anything Connected to Criminal Cunt, Jon Erik Reinhardsen is Corrupt at its Core. Investigate Jon Erik Reinhardsen. Explain the 13 October 2013 Memo, Jon Erik Reinhardsen, you Gutless and Corrupt Mother-F**ker. Too Scared to Invoke the Confidentiality non-Disparagement Terms and Conditions of PGS ASAs Fraudulent Contracts! In a Fair Fight, Child Abusing and Elderly Terrorizing Cowards like Jon Erik Reinhardsen would be Sucking their Testicles through a Straw!
I would be ashamed to be an employee or investor of PGS ASA. In Nazi Germany, citizens feared the sadistic regime. The laws supported the unconscionable brutality toward the helpless. This is not the case with Norway or PGS ASA. There are laws and core values attached to citizenship and employment that admonish workplace bullying and harassment. What is the excuse for employees aiding and abetting Hitlerian sociopaths and criminals? How can so many be so weak? Real power is on the side of doing the right thing and helping the righteous. SDK has been astounded by what moral cowards his former co-workers and hosts were are. What depth of evil would defend these pieces of shit who knowingly withheld a medical report, bullied and harassed a foreign worker with no ties to the community? PGS ASA Board of Directors are criminals and cowards who couldn’t even fathom the hardship they cause much less live it. They all probably thought that they were so clever and entitled only to learn what complete dumb fucks they really were from a USA citizen not willing to be their punching bag. Common sense tells every cognoscente person can see that PGS ASA harbors criminals. Why would a person of honor and healthy self-esteem allow themselves to be disparaged and not to invoke the contractual Confidentiality non-disparagement clauses explicitly in place to stop such publications? Ethical leadership would never allow their employees to be disparaged if the possessed a legal instrument to stop it. There is a one-year limit on filing for defamation from the date content is first published. SDK first posted 3 July 2015.
They are all part of the evil! PGS ASA Board of Directors and management throw the law and core values out the window! PGS ASA bribed my solicitor, for God’s sake! PGS ASA broke the law! These people are such incredible cowards and criminals. And they re defended? Because of the internet, their cowardice, inhumanity, lack of true integrity and true professionalism will follow them. It is SDKs hope that some should go to prison. Followers who say nothing have made the decision to abandon ethical conduct and hurt people. They have chosen evil. But, SDK assures you, evil will lose!
Since 2016, it seemed clear that PGS ASA bribed lawyers to utter the forged documents to support a fraudulent settlement contract. SDK publications wanted to be so over the top that PGS ASA would have to invoke the terms and conditions of the contractual non-disparagement clauses. PGS ASA knows that they would have a lot of explaining to do in the English court of law and they avoid it. Once SDK started publishing images like the one below suggesting that there was a criminal conspiracy and lawyers were bribed to utter forged documents and illegally terminated a whistleblower for PGS ASA, a person claiming to be “Carl Richards”, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited Secretary, finally became alarmed and wrote an e-mail to email@example.com. This was the e-mail provided for communicating about content on the NoPGS.com website where content was mostly published.
PGS ASA has transferred SDK Personal Data Outside EEA and Sponsored Litigation using SDK Processed / Translated Personal Data in Thailand without Consent
PGS ASA CEO & President, Rune Olav Pedersen, PGS ASA CFO & EVP, Gottfred Langseth, and PGS ASA Chief Accountant, Christin Steen-Nilsen serve as Directors for PGS ASA UK Subsidiary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited, 4 The Heights, Brooklands, Weybridge, Surrey, England KT13 0NY. The Directors sponsored litigation in Thailand against a former contracted foreign worker whistleblower.
SDK is a USA citizen and no longer lives in Thailand. PGS ASA has been aware that I reside outside Thailand and returned to the USA since July 2019, as confirmed in e-mail records from PGS UK Head of Legal, John Francas. Further, the referenced 11 November 2018 agreement has been disputed. However, the 11 November 2018 agreement does not declare a physical address for delivering legal notices. The document states an e-mail address. International personal data transfer is also regulated. SDK is not at liberty to stay in Thailand at the discretion of PGS Exploration (UK) Limited arbitrary and capricious”legal” decision making. Apparently, abiding by English law is too restrictive for PGS Exploration (UK) Limited.
Nonetheless, PGS ASA have continued to deliver firm copy “legal documents” through a hired Thai law firm, Duensing – Kippen. PGS ASA has delivered these threatening (extortion / blackmail) “legal notices” to SDK relatives. PGS ASA is intentionally terrorizing old people and children! PGS ASA has never responsibly sent their complaints to SDK directly by e-mail in English. Common sense dictates this would be the most effective approach if PGS ASA was truly concerned about SDK online legally protected public disclosures. The laws of England govern the terms and conditions of the 05 December 2013 termination settlement contract, which is referenced within PGS ASA 16 July 2018 SAR response to the data subject, SDK. This is the agreement SDK choses to abide by for the 15 April 2020 submitted SAR. The 5 December 2013 is also regarded as a fraudulent piece of shit, but according to PGS ASA 16 July 2018SAR response, this contract remains valid.
Records show that PGS ASA / PGS Exploration (UK) Limited was processing / transferring SDK personal data to Thailand (outside the EEA) while processing an SDK 18 Jun 2018 submitted subject access request (SAR). PGS ASA / PGS Exploration (UK) Limited never disclosed nor received consent for this personal data transfer outside the EEA. Further, this sensitive personal data transfer included a photocopy of SDKs USA passport details that was explicitly provided to PGS ASA only to confirm the identity of the data subject for the SAR processing. PGS ASA knowingly withheld information about transferring subject data (SDK) outside the EEA when they had the legal responsibility to disclose (fraud). However, PGS ASA also broke USA Federal law. Photocopying a USA passport without consent is illegal under USA Federal law.
PGS ASA also provided knowing misrepresentations with respect to SDKs data request that explicitly highlighted the processing of SDK e-mails sent to the PGS ASA Compliance Hotline that were never responded to. These e-mails to PGS ASA Compliance provided whistleblowing. SDK asked why these e-mails were never responded to? Copies of these communications were provided to PGS ASA Data Protection Officer (Daphne Bjerke). The response to the 18 June 2018 SDK SAR did not acknowledge the 2016 SAR, but highlighted the 2014 SAR response. Most publications referenced in the Criminal Defamation claim(s) filed in Thailand are in regard SDK disputing the integrity of the contents received from PGS ASA from the 2014 SAR. SDK has contended / published claims with evidence that PGS ASA is uttering forged defamatory unverified / unsigned documents as SDK personal data.
PGS ASA continues to defraud and defame the data subject, SDK. The reason that SDK has submitted a subject access request to PGS ASA in June 2018 is because PGS Exploration (UK) Limited Secretary Carl Richards had resigned 25 May 2018. Also, the General Data Protection Requirement (GDPR) had just replaced the UK Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). Before resigning, Secretary Carl Richards had written threats about filing a criminal defamation suit against SDK as a private person. This would mean that Carl Richards was processing SDK personal data, or at least acknowledging SDK online published protected disclosures – whistleblowing. John Francas replaced Carl Richards and Daphne Bjerke was appointed PGS ASA Data Protection Agency. Daphne Bjerke and John Francas engaged in fraud to protect corrupt PGS ASA Board of Directors and Executives. From the 2014 SAR, SDK discovered that PGS ASA was uttering forged defamatory documents to support an illegally proffered settlement contract. PGS ASA refuses to comment on the unsigned and unverified forgeries which bribed lawyers processed to illegally terminate a foreign worker whistleblower.
SDK submitted a subject access request (SAR) 11 June 2018. PGS Exploration (UK) Limited Secretary, Carl Richards had began blackmailing SDK. Carl Richards was explicit that he was operating independent of his duties as an agent of PGS ASA (Misrepresentation – Fraud). Carl Richards resigned from PGS ASA 25 May 2018. John Francas became the In-house solicitor. SDK requested any personal data that had been processed since his SDK 2014 SAR where he discovered that PGS ASA was uttering forged documents that were used to support a fraudulent termination settlement contract. PGS ASA illegally terminated a foreign worker whistleblower through using forged documents. I sent several complaints to the PGS ASA Compliance in 2016. These complaints were ignored. In 2018, SDK submitted another SAR when the new General Data Protection Requirement came into effect. PGS ASA lied and said that no SDK data was being processed, when it shows that PGS ASA had prepared their illegal blackmail legal claim on 10 July 2018. PGS ASA illegally transferred personal data outside the EEA without consent. PGS ASA also broke USA Federal law by copying and transferring a USA Passport without consent. SDK had provided personal identification data to PGS ASA to process the SAR.
FIRE THE PGS ASA and EQUINOR CORRUPT BOARD OF DIRECTORS WHOSE OBJECTIVE IS TO SUPPRESS THE TRUTH.
Norway’s Equinor and PGS ASA have participated in International Corruption and Human Rights Abuses While Promoting Accused (Known) Criminals to Lead! Hopefully, the USA Federal Racketeering Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) will put these Criminals in Prison where they belong.
PGS ASA and Equinor Board of Directors and Executives Cover-up Corruptionby NOT Invoking the Contractual Confidentiality Terms and Conditions non-disparagement clauses. This Damages PGS ASA and Equinor Value and Reputation, Conceals Corruption, and Injures the Whistleblower, SDK.
DIRECTOR’S SILENCE IS IRRESPONSIBLE and ALLOWS CORRUPTION TO THRIVE. IT PERVERTS the COURSE OF JUSTICE, WHICH is CRIMINAL!
PGS ASA / EQUINOR WANT TO DE-PUBLISH INFORMATION – NOT CLARIFY IT
NORWAY’SPGS ASA, EQUINOR, and TELENOR DO NOT FOLLOW THE NORWEGIAN CODE OF PRACTICE FOR CORPORATE GOVERNANCE or the LAW. THEY ARE CORRUPT. IRRESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP REFUSES TO ANSWER THE MOST SIMPLE COMPLIANCE and GOVERNANCE QUESTIONS AND ALLOW PGS ASA, EQUINOR and TELENOR BRANDS TO BE DIMINISHED.
PGS ASA hired legal firm Watson Farley & Williams to advise on the termination settlement contract agreement between PGS ASA and SDK. PGS ASA, Watson Farley & Williams and Philip Landau (Landau Law) all uttered forged documents (a crime) to support a fraudulent termination settlement contract on false pretenses. PGS ASA, Watson Farley & Williams and Philip Landau also withheld material information: a occupational health nurse medical that confirmed PGS ASA workplace mobbing was health harming. This report was intentionally withheld during negotiationsto allow perpetrators to escape accountability. This further placed SDK and his family in danger. These criminal acts were premeditated and evil and intended to harm the health as well as the professional and financial well-being of a law abiding USA citizen and whistleblower. PGS ASA, Watson Farley & Williams and Philip Landau have defrauded the oil and gas industry investors and employees and placed the health and safety of workers at risks through protecting violent corruption.
PGS ASA Board of Directors and Executive Team Misuse Company Resources to Enrich Themselves. They should be investigated and prosecuted in a court of law. How much shareholder value (money and personnel resources) does PGS ASA spend on illegal vexatious litigation and SEOs to Silence Whistleblowers and Protect Criminals like Gottfred Langseth and Defraud Customers and Investors?
Search engines such as Google and Yahoo use complex algorithms to rank the results of searches that are done on a particular keyword or topic. If a company like Wal-Mart Stores Inc. wants to knock negative results from the top of a search list (e.g., walmartsucks.org), it may hire an SEO vendor to help.
Meanwhile, Google doesn’t seem to have a problem with the whole game [search suppression]. As the world’s largest search engine, a spokesman there says creating new content to hide negative material is fair play.(You can listen to the full broadcast here: The Business Of Burying Internet Search Results)
A breach of fiduciary duty happens if a fiduciary behaves in a manner that contradicts their duty, and there are serious legal implications. It is also easier to prove a breach of fiduciary duty as there is no need to prove fraudulent or criminal intent.
The long-term consequences of these actions can be a devastating, soul crushing and reality-shattering path to be led down. Of course, there are many other types of abuse that can have just as damaging and severe long-term consequences. However, psychological forms of abuse such as gaslighting, mental rape, slander, defamation and distortion campaigns of a person’s reputation are done so covertly and expertly that they are very rarely identified early enough.
A USA Whistleblowers Report on Norwegien Corporate Governance Irresponsibility
Prior to Jon Erik Reinhardsen being appointed as StatOil’s Chairmain of the Board, Reinhardsen served as CEO and President of Petroleum Geo-Services ASA (PGS). During Reinhardsen’s time as CEO, he also served as a director for the UK PGS subsidiary, PGS Exploration (UK) Limited [PGSUK]. I am a USA citizen who worked for PGSUK through their sponsorship of my Tier 2 visa (work permit). PGSUK also sponsored the visas for my dependent family members to live in England. This is relevant to the several whistleblowing blog articles that SDK had published on the LinkedIN™ Pulse platform from 3 July 2015 – 20 August 2016. Many of the LinkedIN™ Pulse blog articles focused on the events, processes, and documentation that led to my termination from employment through a settlement contract agreement. The LinkedIN™ Pulse blog articles presented documentation that supported the published allegations that my termination from PGSUK was illegal and that the settlement contract was supported by uttered forged defamatory documents. The published whistleblowing articles exposed unethical and illegal behavior.
Reinhardsen, as a director of PGSUK and signator of the PGS 2013 CEO Responsibility Letter, should not have ever allowed any of the disparaging content to be published. Reinhardsen needed only to act responsibly and invoke the Confidentiality terms and conditions governing my employment contracts that prohibited the publishing of unprotected disparaging public discloser. In his responsible role, Reinhardsen never commented on, An American, the UK Data Protection Act, Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) and the Tyranny of “Accurate Data” (3-Jul-2015) nor Petroleum Geo-Services (PGS) CEO Jon Erik Reinhardsen Should Resign 2 (20-Sep-2015). Both were published on LinkedIN™ Pulse. SDK was permanently restricted from LinkedIN™ 20 August 2016 for publishing several disparaging articles, as well as publishing interrogatories within the PGS LinkedIN™ comment space, from 3 July 2015 through 20 August 2016. However, PGS has cited no breach in the Confidentiality terms and conditions in the contracts governed by the laws of England. PGS first misrepresented protected public disclosure as defamation to LinkedIN™ content administrators, which kept any bona fide dispute over content out of the courts. PGS also violated the terms and conditions of these contracts through not thoroughly investigating the publications as whistleblowing. PGS defamed and defrauded me. Both contracts provided protection for whistleblowing, per the UK Public Interests Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA) that was included within the Confidentiality clauses in both of the contracts governed by the laws of England.
SDK LinkedIN™ Pulse Blog Articles Disparaging Norway’s PGS:
PGS had the fiduciary responsibility to all stakeholder to invoke the terms and conditions of the employment contract and not simply provide the ridiculous response within the PGS LinkedIN™ comment space or e-mail. In other words, the matter should have been resolved in the courts of England whose laws governed both contracts terms and conditions. From April 2016 – September 2016, protected public disclosure – whistleblowing – content was sent directly or through links to the PGS Compliance Hotline, which at that time was represented by then PGS General Counsel, Rune Olav Pedersen; PGS SVP Global Human Resources, Terje Bjølseth; and PGS VP Compliance and Internal Audit, Silke Hitschke. The PGS Compliance Team never responded to nor commented on any of the obviously disparaging published content. PGS General Counsel Pedersen and PGS Exploration (UK) Limited secretary, Carl Richards, both lawyers, should have fully understood these responsibilities. The reason no action was taken was because Pedersen and Richards were both implicated in criminal behaviors (and still are). PGS legal compliance for both PGS (Norway) and PGSUK (England) should have been guiding the decisions formed and executed by the PGSUK directors with respect to my 20 September 2013 submitted grievance which culminated in my termination through settlement contract.
PGSUK directors were PGS CEO, Jon Erik Reinhardsen, PGS CFO, Gottfred Langseth, and PGS Chief Accountant, Christin Steen – Nilsen. Richards served as PGSUK company secretary. Through my sponsored work permit, I possessed a legal right to submit a workplace grievance and proceed through the legal processes published within the UK Personnel Handbook. The submitted grievance cited health and safety concerns, management malpractice, violations in duty of care and mutual trust and confidence, as well as violations in PGS policy and UK employment laws. My grievance was whistleblowing. The main effort by the cabal has been to pervert the course of justice and deny the victim of their crimes voice and legal due process. In fact, this was the principal incentive for PGS bribing legal firms Watson Farley & Williams (WFW) and my legal counsel, Landau, Zeffertt and Weir Employment Solicitors (LZW). (Evidence of this has also been published within my articles.) This evidence points to a criminal conspiracy and confidence fraud to illegally terminate a foreign worker whistleblower under false pretenses using uttered forged documents. PGS, WFW and LZW continue to obstruct justice, withhold information, and deny their victim of crimes and whistleblower legal due process. PGS, WFW and LZW have remained silent to avoid having to explain in a court of law what facts guided their decisions and resulted in continued whistleblowing publications! If not criminals, then PGS, WFW, and LZW lawyers have been behaving like morons.
After my employment with PGSUK was terminated through settlement contract, I returned to Houston, Texas, USA. While in Houston, I detected what I believed were violations in the terms and conditions of that contract. I believed that I was being blacklisted in the Houston job market. This led to my submitting a subject access request (SAR) to PGSUK and PGS in October 2014 citing the UK Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). It was through this request that I was provided with copies of the contents of my PGSUK personnel file. This is when I discovered that PGSUK was processing defamatory forged documents as my personal data. Of course, I complained vigorously to PGS, as well as to the Information’s Commissioner’s Office (ICO) who regulate DPA compliance. PGS did threaten taking litigation through a 22 December 2014 e-mail, over a year after signing the settlement contract in dispute, if I continued to complain about the illegal forgeries that they were being processed. Because of the binding nature of a settlement contracts, no UK lawyer would consider legal actions against PGSUK. As already stated, I published an article 3 July 2015. This was the first article which named names, including Reinhardsen. When I heard nothing from PGS / PGSUK, I submitted my first report to UK ActionFraud (police). Following the collapse in oil prices mid-2014, combined with the defamatory material that PGS was processing to facilitate legal-looking defamation and blacklisting, I moved to Thailand, which had been my home of record when I worked with PGS offshore or on rotational assignment.
It has been only recently, since returning back to the USA, that I have recognized that the firm post mailing (DHL) of forged documents and subsequent e-mail communications following my receipt of personal data from PGSUK in 2014 that I identified these as also being violations in US Federal Laws (mail fraud, wire fraud, etc.). Because of this, I filed a report to the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). I believe that PGS ASAs coordinated deception and disinformation campaign aimed at a whistleblower, but impacting several stakeholders in the upstream oil and gas industry, constitutes violations in the US Federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) which is intended to allow multiple laws to prosecute organized crime. While I understand the difficulty in getting police to actually investigate white collar criminals, I am 100 % certain that I am a victim of crimes. I have published a substantial quantity of disparaging / whistleblowing content on the internet that show up prominently in search engine results referencing PGS ASA.
Investors and stakeholders must ask how is it possible that accused criminal Reinhardsen escapes scrutiny and investigation and serves as a director on several prestigious Norwegian majority owned companies, such as Equinor and Telenor, since leaving his role as CEO and President of PGS? Reinhardsen has not completely divorced himself from PGS, as he also currently continues to serve as a director (Chairmain) for the USA PGS subsidiary, Petroleum Geo-Services, Inc. [PGSUS], in Houston, Texas. The other director of PGSUS are none other than PGS CFO Gottfred Langseth and PGS Chief Accountant, Christin Steen-Nilsen. The same individuals who managed the illegal termination of a foreign worker whistleblower in England uttered the defamatory forgeries in the US to illegally blacklist their victim of crimes and whistleblower! I have concluded that accused criminal and abuser Reinhardsen and his cabal are being protected by a corrupt and dysfunctional Norwegian corporate governance system. (It pains me to publish this.) The global marketplace must demand a thorough investigation of Reinhardsen and those who empower and enable him. Why does Norway promote accused violent criminals and human rights violators who intentionally jeopardize the health and well-being and rob a US citizen whistleblower and his Thai – USA family members?
The only reason that so many articles and comments were published on the LinkedIN™ platform was because PGS not only never cited a breach in the Confidentiality terms and conditions, but also never answered several e-mails and social media messages containing content disparaging PGS! In other words, PGSUK directors did not honor the terms and conditions of contracts and instead allowed disparaging publications to continue. This was done to hide the fact that PGS had illegally terminated a foreign worker whistleblower on false pretenses using fraudulent data (uttered defamatory forged documents). Lawyers for other parties involved in forming the settlement contract; PGS, LZW (now Landau Law), and WFW, also remained silent to allow the fraud and defamation of the whistleblower to continue. Further, while anonymous complaints made to LinkedIN™ stated that the published content was defamatory, the UK Limitation Act 1980 prohibits defamation claims for content published more than one-year. LinkedIN™ restricted my account 20 August 2016, this is over one year from the first published article on 3 July 2015. There is no limitation on citing breaches in the contractual Confidentiality terms and conditions.
Nopgs.com Publications following SDK LinkedIN™Restriction and Prior to Reinhardsen Resignation from PGS
(20-Aug-2016 thru 18-Jun-2017)
PGS ASA disinformation and defamation of SDK facilitated the restriction of SDKs LinkedIN™account. PGS ASA withheld material information and did not invoke Contract Confidentiality terms and conditions as they were legally obligated to do per CONTRACT. PGS lied. SDK was defamed to over 4900 followers/professionals and the entire LinkedIN™community. SDK also hosted the Marine Seismic Survey group with over 1500 members.
Following my restriction on LinkedIN™, I formed an independent website, nopgs.com, whose acronym stood for NO Psychopaths in Geo-Services. I was confident that the several blog articles published were whistleblowing and also in many ways redundant in their content. In other words, not citing content as a breach immediately following publication 3 July 2015 would make it difficult for any legal claim to succeed, regardless of their veracity. Publications after 20 August 2016 essentially state the same allegations as previous articles. However, I was beginning to see the conspiracy more clearly. The reason that PGS and WFW had remained irresponsibly and fraudulently silent is because what the cabal did to me and my family is reprehensible. Their criminal acts were viscious and premeditated and deserve punishment to the full extent of the law. Considering their positions of responsibility, there needs to be congruent accountability. Several PGS employees have been empowered and rewarded for breaching the PGS Code of Conduct and PGS Core Values in order to protect corrupt and criminal PGS Board of Directors and several PGS executives. Agents for WFW have aided and abetted their client PGS in perverting the course of justice. All have been able to escape responsibility and accountability for their crimes. They have all behaved unethically and criminally to physically, professionally, and financially harm a foreign worker whistleblower who deserved their Duty of Care. None have ever been compelled to address even the most basic published accusations.
PGS, WFW have invested substantial resources of personnel and money focused on harming an HSE whistleblower and victims of crimes. Most every post has made a very simple request for a trustworthy third-party, preferably government law enforcement, to investigate PGS, WFW, and LZW agents who were directly involved in proffering the settlement contract and not proceding through a legitimate grievance process. While I had an account on LinkedIN™ and used it to publish protected public disclosure, I would sometimes share content using Twitter™. Many of my comments and article links were directed to PGS’ Twitter™ account, @PGSNews, and to a lesser extent WFW (@WFW_LLP) and Landau Law (@philiplandau, formerly LZW), Twitter™ accounts. However, no legal action was ever initiated in spite of the publishing substantive disparaging content identifying them specifically. PGS legal, and two legal firms are directly implicated through online publications of criminal acts. The cabal never discontinued their defamation and defrauding of a whistleblower and victim of their crimes. The cabal continue to utter defamatory forged documents and retain their false defamatory narrative through their not invoking the Confidentiality clauses in our contracts.
Most of the Twitter™ feeds were delivered by @boycottpgs that was created to support the nopgs.com website that hosted my publications, including many that had first been published on LinkedIN™. However, as time passed, I also delivered from my personal Twitter™, @sdkgeop. During April 2018, I was contacted via my e-mail attached to the nopgs.com website by someone who purported to be from the PGSUK secretary and UK lawyer, Carl Richards. Within this mail, Richards threatened to file criminal defamation claims against me in Thailand, where I was residing at the time. I did respond. However, I requested identification verification before I engaged the sender to much. The sender never confirmed his identity. However, I rejected the view that defamation charges could be filed against by Carl Richards as a private person divorced from his official role as company secretary and the PGSUK contract terms and conditions that bound our legal relationship that was governed by the laws of England!
Reinhardsen retired as President and CEO of PGS and assumed the role of Chairman of the Board of Directors for Norway’s StatOil September 2017. Rune Olav Pedersen was appointed President and CEO of PGS and also replaced Reinhardsen as a director for PGSUK. Reinhardsen, nor anyone from PGS ever had engaged me regarding my legally protected public disclosure. Not anyone disparaged directly through nopgs.com publications independently disputed nor complained. Reinharden certainly never effectively performed his fiduciary duty as either PGSUK director or PGS CEO to defend the reputation of the several PGS employees named and accused of crimes within the LinkedIN™, Twitter™ or nopgs.com publications. Reinhardsen also never followed through on promises stated within his responsibility letter. Reinhardsen breached policy and broke the law. Even if I publish that Reinhardsen is a cowardly and incompetent piece of shit who is too frightened to defend his decisions. Reinhardsen has never invoked the Confidentiality terms and conditions. The problem is that Reinhardsen took license to attack and harm me and my family. It is personal. Moreover, it seems that Reinhardsen has been able to do this with the full support of the corrupted Norwegian corporate governance infrastructure to aid him. What else can explain his appointment of director for both Equinor and Telenor? Fuck you, Jon Erik Reinhardsen! (Is this disparaging to Telenor and Equinor?)
PGS ASA and Duensing – Kippen want SDK to Fly Thousands of Kilometres from USA to Thailand to Testify in Thai about Legally Protected Public Disclosures Published in English Regarding a Company Governed by the Laws of England? But, Lawyers from PGS ASA, Duensing – Kippen, Watson Farley & Williams and Landau Law won’t even answer e-mails or Open Letters! A contract formed by Duensing – Kippen on behalf of PGS ASA, 11 November 2018, in Thailand states USA Federal Court, Harris County, Texas, USA as a resolution venue. Legal claims are filed in the Thai language and delivered to the address of a previous visa sponsor address in Thailand and not SDKs legal address. SDK believes that the 11 November 2018 signed agreements with PGS ASA and Carl Richards are fraudulent.