Chung and his company, 1955 Capital, have repeatedly sought to keep the documents sealed to prevent their open examination. Judge Vince Chhabria of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied those efforts and ordered most of the key documents to be made public.

The arbitration documents reveal that shortly after receiving GIIL’s initial deposit of $80 million in November 2015, Chung secretly made “unilateral changes” to the limited partnership agreements between GIIL and 1955 Capital that directly benefitted Chung and his company and “fundamentally changed the risks” of GIIL’s investment, the arbitrator determined. Under these changes, even a small missed payment by GIIL would allow 1955 Capital to cancel GIIL’s entire interest in the funds resulting a total forfeiture of GIIL’s initial $80 million deposit.

This explains why 1955 Capital eagerly initiated the arbitration, based on the documents that contain his secret changes, to seek forfeiture of GIIL’s investment at time when 1955 had only invested $4 million of the total funds. If GIIL had missed a payment, it would allow 1955 Capital to pocket the $70 million left in the escrowed funds, which is exactly what 1955 Capital sought to achieve.

Further, the arbitrator found that Chung actively concealed these unauthorized contractual changes from GIIL, and, in so doing Chung and 1955 Capital “acted in their own interests, and with reckless disregard for the interests of” GIIL. These are horrendous behaviors by Andrew Chung, a fiduciary, who is trusted to manage hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of its sole investor and are at the heart of the pending legal actions.

It’s abundantly clear from these documents why Andrew Chung was so desperate to keep them secret: Even in their redacted form they provide the proof that Chung deliberately schemed to steal $80 million from GIIL and sought to conceal this immense misbehavior. Now both the public and the courts can evaluate the full merits of our case.

The arbitrator also found that Chung made other unauthorized changes, including the deletion of a requirement that the funds intend to make the majority of its investments in mobile software and services. Even after arbitrator ruled that such deletion was ineffective and in violation of Chung’s fiduciary duties, Chung continues to flaunt this requirement and mislead the public and portfolio companies, which has forced GIIL to bring another arbitration to stop Chung’s violations.

1955 Capital portrayed GIIL as being desperate to escape from a contractual obligation, but it was 1955 Capital that initiated the arbitration after it had made the unauthorized changes and set up the default trap. GIIL was rightfully alarmed by 1955 Capital’s aggressive pursuit of tens of millions of dollars to enrich himself and had to defend its own interests after it learned that 1955 Capital had changed the agreements to set up a default trap.

1955 Capital has belittled CFLD/GIIL’s legal efforts in defending its interests as “Hail Mary,” “fictitious,” “grossly mis-portraying,” and an “unfounded,” efforts, but it is 1955 Capital that has tried desperately to file everything under seal because Mr. Chung and 1955 Capital know its actions were both a gross breach of fiduciary duties and the clear demonstration of fraudulent attempts to steal GIIL’s investment. In fact, Chung has continued his apprehensive misbehaviors to this day, taking GIIL’s remaining funds hostage, hiding behind the arbitration’s confidentiality he deliberately set up, and actively preventing the public and portfolio companies from access to full information. The truth about 1955 Capital, however, will come out in due course.