September 27 and 28th | Chanlder, Arizona APSA Annual Meeting and Educational Seminar
CALSPro CCPS Workshop
This workshop will feature a comprehensive study of the primary California process serving codes, and all the information needed to pass the CCPS exam. In addition to the standard workshop this seminar will include a portion dedicated to the beginning or inexperienced process server.
A Professional Organization of Licensed Private Investigators
Los Angeles Private Investigator and Process Server
PMC is a professional organization of State licensed Investigators that are devoted
entirely to providing exceptional service at competitive rates.
PMC's Investigators are among the most qualified and experienced the industry has to offer.
A perfect combination of State of the art investigative techniques in addition to an incomparable database.
PMC Surpasses the Competition...
Los Angeles Process Server
PMC's staff takes pride in our accomplishments and strives to furnish perfection
while utilizing the most modern and cost effective investigative techniques available today.
PMC provides investigative and intelligence assistance to a wide variety of differing professions,
from attorney services to automobile dealers, from restaurants to the everyday citizen, all of which have become accustomed to receiving nothing but the best.
It has always been and shall continue to be the policy of this agency to extend honest and sincere efforts in the pursuit of all assignments while supported by capable P.I.'s who apply appropriate methods and approaches to the situation under investigation. This policy assures our clients of the most effective techniques available in the handling of their cases.
No Investigative agency can perform miracles by guaranteeing 100% results in all cases, anymore than an attorney can guarantee his clients complete victory or a doctor guarantee that his patients will recover from serious illness.
Success in these fields depends upon the services of competent people who are thoroughly proficient and capable of applying the principals most likely to obtain positive results.
Subject:Alarm Company QM Exam Development Experts Wanted
Date: 5/31/2016 9:43:06 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Apply to be a Subject Matter Expert (SME)
to assist in the Bureau’s Occupational Analysis Workshops
As an expert, you will have the opportunity to contribute to your profession and work with other licensed Alarm Company Operator Qualified Managers from around the state to assist in the completion of an occupational analysis. Your knowledge and experience as a qualified manager is essential for the success of this process.
Click here for further information about the occupational analysis workshops and how to participate.
LAS VEGAS (CN) - A federal judge Monday vacated an $11.8 million default judgment against a Canadian technology firm and a former board member due to improper service of summons.
U.S. District Judge Philip M. Pro set aside a default judgment against former ISee3D board member Ilya Sorokin, for Panliant Financial's improper service of summons.
Pro gave Panliant until Jan. 6 to show why the complaint should not be dismissed without prejudice, for failure to meet an Aug. 5, 2013 deadline for serving ISee3D.
ISee3D is a Canadian company that owns several patents and "specialized knowhow" for using a single lens to capture 3D images for home entertainment, professional industries, consumer electronics and other applications, according to BusinessWeek.
Panliant, in an affidavit of service, said it served ISee3D on Feb. 6 by leaving the summons in a mail slot at ISee3D's registered office address.
Nevada-based Panliant accused ISee3D, Sorokin of state and federal RICO violations, fraud, misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and breach of fiduciary duties. The August 2012 lawsuit arose from a consulting contract between ISee3D and Panliant.
Panliant filed an amended complaint in December 2012, and the court gave Panliant until Aug. 5, 2013, to complete service to all defendants.
Panliant filed an affidavit of service claiming the summons and amended complaint were "served on Sorokin on July 18, 2013, 'by leaving [it] with the gate/guard doorman'" at a New York apartment building, Pro says in his summary of the case.
Sorokin says the apartment is a corporate apartment "'leased by ActForex'" and "'used by out-of-town company executives and occasionally clients, when they come to New York City,'" according to the judge. Sorokin says his permanent residence at the time of service was in Connecticut.
"Sorokin argues leaving the summons and amended complaint with the doorman at a building where he does not maintain his permanent residence does not constitute personal service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e)," Pro wrote.
Because the summons was served at the New York apartment, Sorokin says, he did not learn of the case until March or April 2014.
Panliant claims Nevada law "permits service of process on a guard at a guard gate who denies access to a residence," Pro wrote. Panliant also argues that federal law allows service at the New York apartment due to Sorokin's having "more than one dwelling."
Panliant on March 25 entered a motion for default judgment against Sorokin and ISee3D, saying they had been served and missed their respective Aug, 8, 2013, and Feb. 27, 2014, deadlines to appear or respond.
The clerk entered the default judgment against both defendants, and Panliant moved for an $11,864,246.66 judgment against them. Sorokin opposed the motion, while ISee3D did not respond, Pro wrote.
"Sorokin's failure to answer was not culpable," Pro found. "He has a good faith explanation for his failure to answer the Amended Complaint by the deadline because Sorokin contends that service of process on the doorman at the New York City corporate apartment was improper."
Sorokin also claims that the amended complaint does not allege facts that demonstrate the court has jurisdiction over him or that he directed ISee3D's business activities in Nevada.
Pro granted Sorokin's motion to vacate the clerk's default judgment and denied Panliant's motion for default judgment.
Process Server's Possibly Illegal Arrest Caught on Camera
August 05, 2013 by Kimberly Faber
In the latest development in an ongoing investigation into a Texas judge, a process server was arrested while attempting to serve Judge Layne Walker legal documents in a courtroom. Process server Steve Hartman was trying to serve Walker with a federal summons regarding a civil rights complaint alleging mistreatment of a local criminal defense attorney and civil rights leader at the courthouse.
According to signed witness affidavits, Hartman crossed the bench, shoved papers in a deputy's face, and tried to push past to reach the judge. The arrest, however, was captured on video through the process server’s ballpoint pen camera. It's now been revealed that the captured footage may contradict what the signed affidavits say happened.
Hartman’s attorney believes that his rights were violated and declares that the witness affidavits signed by Sergeant Steve Broussard (shown in the video), Deputy Sharon Williams (shown in the video), and attorney Joe Vazquez, are not truthful.
“The video contradicts all of the witness affidavits,” the attorney said in an interview with the news station. “None of the affidavits contain truthful evidence. The video is very clear on that.”
The video contradicts all of the witness affidavits. None of the affidavits contain truthful evidence. The video is very clear on that.
Attorney John Morgan
Hartman’s disbelief is clear. “Here I am under the assumption that I’m on the same team as these people,” he said. “I just can’t believe it.” He was charged with hindering a proceeding by disorderly conduct. Upon his release, his possessions were return to him with the exception of the ballpoint camera pen. A mini screwdriver was in its place. Further investigation revealed that Sergeant Broussard had taken the pen home with him before entering it into evidence.
With the release of the video, an internal investigation of the incident is now underway and Sergeant Broussard has been placed on paid leave.
But according to the report, some law enforcement officials say there’s more to the video that has not been released. “They didn’t specify what it shows, but they did imply that it more clearly supports statements made by the witnesses,” the reporter said.
A longer version of the courtroom incident video was recently uploaded to YouTube. The six-minute video can be viewed below:
The differences in witness accounts and what is shown in the video are compared below.
Hartman approached Sergeant Steve Broussard
He then crossed the bar, the area that separates courtroom personnel from the public.
Hartman tried to get to the judge’s bench and was intercepted by Sergeant Broussard
Hartman attempted to push past Broussard
Harman shoved papers in Deputy Williams’ face
There was yelling in the back of the courtroom
The above information was drawn from witness statements by Sergeant Steve Broussard, Deputy Sharon Williams, and attorney Joe Vazquez as presented by 12news.
What the Video Shows:
Hartman approaching the bench
Deputy Williams approaches Hartman, who says: “I’m a process server. I need to serve process on the judge.”
Williams whispers something that is not clear and goes to Broussard, during which Hartman says, “You can’t not allow me.”
Broussard approaches Hartman pointing toward the door and says, “You’re going out or you’re going under arrest.”
Hartman is taken to the back of the room and handcuffed (handcuffing not visibly shown)
Hartman is taken into a holding room where his possessions are confiscated.
The incident took place on May 28th, but this was not the first encounter
between Hartman and Judge Walker. A complaint filed by Hartman prior to the courtroom service attempt alleges that Judge Walker pulled a gun on him while he was attempting to serve a subpoena for civil records at the judge’s home. Further investigation reveals that this is just one occurrence in a long string of events involving the judge.
According to several news sources, Judge Walker is under investigation by the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct due to allegations of corruption. Over a year ago, private investigator Philip Klein discovered that the judge may have been misusing money from the Texas Indigent Defense Fund. The same WND report shares that state and court records reveal accusations that Walker, “purportedly interfered in a child custody dispute involving an attorney he did not like.” The involved attorney, John Morgan, was representing Klein at the time. He is the same John Morgan that now represents Steve Hartman.
Hartman has been a licensed process server since 2008, and is now suing the judge, the involved deputies, and a court coordinator as well as The County of Jefferson Texas and The State of Texas. Hartman is claiming loss of income, loss of business, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life, and seeks $250,000 from The State of Texas, $250,000 from Judge Walker, and $250,000 each from the involved deputies and court coordinator. Further allegations that the judge and deputies dismantled his phone, downloaded its contents, and are now calling Hartman’s contacts to intimidate them are included in the complaint. A timeline of the day’s events can be viewed below.
Timeline of events (according to the complaint):
What initially may have been the story of law officers working against rather than in aid of a process server is now another investigation into the potential corruption of Judge Walker and the Jefferson County Court. Hartman states that he chose to serve Walker at his place of employment for safety reasons, but many questions arise from the incident. Should Hartman have waited outside of the courtroom for a recess? Should the judge remain on the bench while under investigation? Were the sergeant and deputy at fault and abusing their powers or simply following orders? A number of questions remain unanswered as many details are still unclear in this case, but the overarching question of the matter is this: is this just another example of law enforcement working against process servers?
Notice of BSIS Advisory Committee Meeting July 7, 2016
The Bureau of Security and Investigative Services will hold an Advisory Committee Meeting on July 7, 2016 in the Department of Consumer Affairs hearing room located at 1625 North Market Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95834.
Click here to view a copy of the agenda and meeting materials. The webcast will begin live streaming at the start of the Advisory Committee Meeting.
Subject:Adding Calibers to an Existing Firearms Permit
This notice follows up the Bureau’s advisement in June 2016 that it had
suspended the practice of adding a caliber to a current BSIS Firearms
Permit because the process being used was not specified in law.
After extensive analysis of the laws and regulations, the Bureau has
determined that the only legal pathway to add a caliber to an existing firearms
permit under current Bureau law and regulations is for the permit holder to
complete the course of training in the carrying and use of a firearm required
to obtain an initial firearm permit, as prescribed by, Title 16, Division 7,
Section 635 of the California Code of Regulations.
⦁Completion of at least 8 hours of classroom instruction on the carrying and use of a firearm,
⦁Passing a Bureau-approved written firearm exam with a minimum score of 85%, and
⦁Discharging 50 rounds a minimum of two (2) times,
one (1) round for practice and one (1) round for score.
Pursuant to Business and Professions Code sections 7583.2(f) and 7599.40,
the Bureau has developed the Certificate of Proficiency in Specified Caliber(s)
and Request for Replacement Permit form.
to assist in the completion of an exam development workshop has posted.
Click here to view the recruitment information in its entirety.
Click here to download the Subject Matter Expert Registration Form
to apply to participate in the occupational analysis workshops.
This is a reminder that as of September 1, 2016 the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services (Bureau) will only accept the newest versions of Firearms Permit Initial Application and Firearms Permit Renewal Application from applicants applying for an initial firearms permit or renewing a current firearms permit.
The Bureau will accept requalifications to renew a firearms permit which were completed prior to September 1, 2016 on the prior version of the form, but requalifications completed after September 1st will need to be submitted on the new application form.
The Bureau of Security and Investigative Services (Bureau) is beginning the
process of developing its strategic plan for the years 2017 through 2021.
To assist us with this effort, the Bureau is utilizing the services of the
Department of Consumer Affairs’ SOLID Planning Solutions Unit (SOLID).
SOLID created a short survey to solicit feedback from our various
stakeholders regarding the Bureau’s performance in carrying out activities
relating to its core regulatory areas as well as overall.
Your completion of this survey will provide valuable input that will
assist the Bureau to identify objectives and action plans for our new
strategic plan that are appropriate and relevant to our organizational development.
Thank you in advance for completing the survey.
NOTE: The survey will close at 11:59 on Sunday, November 27, 2016.
Additionally, all survey responses are anonymous.
Click this link to access SOLID’s survey:
Subject: Attention Alarm Company Operator Qualified Managers
The Bureau is currently recruiting Alarm Company Operator Qualified Managers
to participate as subject matter experts (SME) in the Occupational Analysis
Workshops scheduled for November 17-18, 2016 and January 25-26, 2017.
In the November workshop, SMEs will work to finalize the task and
knowledge statements compiled in the telephone interviews and
develop a questionnaire for distribution.
In the January workshop, SMEs will work to review the results to the questionnaire.
The results are then used to update the description of the Alarm Company
profession and develop the content for the next qualified manager exam.
If you are a current active Alarm Company Operator Qualified Manager
in good standing with the Bureau and are interested in participating as a SME contact Justina Binsfeld at email@example.com to request a
The Bureau is working to update the online registration form and
will notify you once the updated form has posted.
Thank you for your interest.
The Bureau of Security and Investigative Services (Bureau) is recruiting Private Patrol Operator (PPO) Qualified Managers (QM) to assist in the completion of an Exam Development workshop scheduled for December 6-7, 2016.
In the December workshop, Exam Construction/Passing Score, SMEs will be asked to take the exam, rate the difficulty of the items, and participate in workshop discussion.
If you are currently an active Private Patrol Operator Qualified Manager in good standing with the Bureau and are interested in participating as a SME you may contact Justina Binsfeld at firstname.lastname@example.org for more information or visit our website using the links below.
The Bureau of Security and Investigative Services (BSIS) will hold an
Advisory Committee Meeting on January 12, 2017 in the Department of
Consumer Affairs' hearing room located at
1625 North Market Boulevard, Sacramento, CA 95834.
The below updates have been made to the License Search feature of the
• A complete Address of Record will now be displayed for each Company License.
• The City, State and Zip Code will now be displayed for each Employee License.
If a name search is done and a list of licensees are displayed, the City will not be viewable;
you will be required to click into each individual’s name to see the city.
The department is working on having the city display on a name search list through
a new license search platform that should be available later this year.
In November 2016, the Bureau secured CPS HR Consulting (CPS) to carry out an
audit of the Bureau’s performance, relating to the Private Security Services Fund,
to determine whether current license fee levels adequately support expenditures
associated with carrying out program activities. CPS completed the audit in
April 2017 and the findings detailed in the CPS BSIS Performance and Fee Report.
The full report is available on the Bureau’s website.
The Bureau is inviting you to participate in the 2017 Occupational Analysis
(OA) survey regarding the Alarm Company profession.
The survey will be available until June 10, 2017 , 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
It will take approximately 60 minutes to complete the online survey questionnaire.
For your convenience, you may begin the survey questionnaire and exit to return
at a later time, as long as it is from the same computer.
If you are interested in helping us out with this important project, please:
The Survey Web-link Password is: ACQ2016 (all UPPER case)
About the Survey:
As you know, the Bureau is responsible for developing examinations to test
applicant’s skills for licensure in California. The development of an examination
begins with an occupational analysis which is a method for identifying the tasks
performed in a profession and the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to perform the job.
The OA is only conducted every five to seven years and the results are
very important to the development of the written exams.
Workshops with Alarm Company Qualified Managers (ACQ) have been
held in Sacramento, conducted by the Office of Professional Examination Services
(OPES). As a result of their efforts, a survey questionnaire has been developed and
we invite you to participate in evaluating the 2017 OA as it relates to the current
practice of the Alarm industry. Your response will be combined with responses
of other Alarm Company Qualified Manager professionals to determine the tasks
and knowledge needed for independent practice.
Your individual responses will be kept confidential.
Again, we appreciate your dedication to your profession and to our
mission of protecting the consumers of California by licensing
qualified and competent providers.
Google reviews John L. 2 days ago I spoke with several local process servers before calling Paul... I was not sure of the defendants address so I needed a Private Investigator that could find him. Within 3 hours of calling Paul my papers were served !
Michelle Andersen 1 week ago Needed a Restraining Order served on my Ex-Husband, I asked for one hour service, nobody I called could do it, then I called PMC, he said he would be there in 30 - 45 minutes and he was! He served my Ex and now I'm safe! Thank You Mr Paul...
Ted Camandar 2 weeks ago I have been using the wrong process server for years. You guys are without a doubt the best Process Service Company in Los Angeles!
Correction to July 17, 2017 Alarm Company Operator Disciplinary Review Committee Agenda
The published agenda for the July 17, 2017 Alarm Company Operator
Disciplinary Review Committee contained a misprint.
The published agenda listed the address of the hearing as
2420 Del Paso Blvd. instead of 2420 Del Paso Rd.
The hearing will be held in Room 109 at the Bureau’s location
at 2420 Del Paso Rd., Sacramento, CA 95834.
Repossession Agency Qualified Managers Wanted!
Would you like to be a Subject Matter Expert (SME) for the Bureau?
As an expert, you will have the opportunity to contribute to your
profession by assisting the Bureau in its Exam Development process.
Your knowledge and experience as a qualified manager is essential for
the success of this process. Subject Matter Experts are compensated
$200.00/per day for participation.
How do I qualify to participate?
To qualify to serve as a subject matter expert you must:
- Be a licensed Repossession Agency Qualified Manager
- Be actively working as a Repossession Agency Qualified Manager
The Bureau is recruiting Alarm Company Operator Qualified Managers
to participate as Subject Matter Experts (SME) in the Occupational
Analysis Workshops scheduled for September 6-7, 2017.
If you are an active Alarm Company Operator Qualified Manager,
in good standing with the Bureau and are interested in participating as a
SME please contact Justina Binsfeld at email@example.com to request
a registration form. Workshops are 2 days long and SMEs
receive $200.00 per day for their participation.
When: September 6-7, 2017
Where: Sacramento, CA
What is it: Occupational analysis workshops serve as focus groups to provide subject matter expert input regarding survey design and analysis of the survey results. The purpose of the pre-survey workshop is to review and modify the tasks and knowledge statements developed from interviews conducted with SMEs. In addition, participants will write new task and knowledge statements as needed. After the survey data is collected, workshops are conducted to evaluate the results of the occupational analysis questionnaire and determine cut off values for keeping or eliminating tasks and knowledge so that only critical statements remain. These critical statements will then be linked together to construct the examination outline. Throughout this process information will be gleaned to identify and develop terminology and reference lists regarding the profession
Thank you for your interest.
In response to the recent regulatory changes, the Bureau issued letters to Firearms Training Facilities notifying them that the Bureau updated the Firearms Permit Initial Application Form and the Firearms Permit Renewal Application Form. The new forms (June 2017 revision date) are on the Bureau’s website. The Firearms Permit Initial Application (Revised June 2017) can be found at http://www.bsis.ca.gov/forms_pubs/fq_initial.pdf . The Firearms Permit Renewal Application (Revised June 2017) can be found at http://www.bsis.ca.gov/forms_pubs/fq_renewal.pdf .The new revised applications go into effect immediately. If you are unable to download the applications from the Bureau’s website, email Facilitiesandinstructors.firstname.lastname@example.org to request a hardcopy of each new revised application to be mailed to you.
Effective September 1, 2017, the new application forms must be used to document any firearms training completed by an individual seeking an initial firearms permit or range qualifications completed by an individual for the purpose of renewing a Firearms Permit.
Due to high call volumes, the Bureau suggests submitting any questions you may have regarding this information to email@example.com . Please allow five business days for the
Bureau to respond to policy-related questions.
Subject:Important Firearms Application Update to BreEZe
Please be advised that effective the evening of September 13, 2017, the ability to submit BSIS initial and renewal Firearms Permit applications as well as Add Caliber requests through BreEZe will be discontinued. This discontinuation is needed due to the high number of submissions without the required scan of the signed application form, which creates application processing delays.
The Bureau will process all initial and renewal Firearms Permit applications and Add Caliber requests submitted through BreEZe prior to the point of the BreEZe functions being shut down for these application types.
However, after the shutdown, all initial and renewal Firearms Permit applications and Add Caliber request should be submitted through the mail to P.O. Box 989002, West Sacramento, CA 95798.
Please note that by law a Firearms Permit Renewal Application MUST be submitted at least 60 days before the expiration date of the current permit. Additionally, please read the instructions on the application form closely to help prevent deficiencies in the application you submit.