Evidence Record

Exhibit 14

Page 2 of 6 PageID# 2815 16/2026 6:47 PM Marilyn Burgess - District Clerk Harris County Envelope No. 109732259 By: Shanelle Taylor Filed: 1/6/2026 6:47 PM

Type
exhibit
Court
EDVA
Case
HII v. Cyberlux interpleader
Docket
3:25-cv-00483
Pages
6
Lines
145
SHA-256
dca49912ce86

DISTIL analysis

DISTIL Run
Profile
Standard
Version
1
Doc Type
Legal Motion for Distribution of Receivership Funds
Total Nodes
29
Node Legend
Entity (ENT)
Event (EVT)
Claim (CLM)
Anchor (ANC)
Omission (OMI)
Tension (TEN)
Tell (TEL)
Inference (INF)
Hypothesis (HYP)
Stage 1
Index
Orientation · No nodes
Document Classification
Legal Motion for Distribution of Receivership Funds Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors through counsel in Texas state court Post-judgment enforcement proceeding involving cross-jurisdictional debt collection 2023-06-23 to 2026-01-06
cross_jurisdictionalreceivershipattorney_fee_disputeresistance_patternpartial_satisfaction
Analytical Frame
Multi-jurisdictional judgment enforcement with parallel receivership and garnishment actions
Analytical Summary
This motion, filed January 6, 2026 in Harris County, Texas, seeks court-ordered distribution of $857,734.19 from receivership funds to satisfy outstanding attorney fees and costs incurred by Atlantic Wave Holdings and Secure Community in enforcing a $1,572,500 Virginia judgment against Cyberlux Corporation and Mark Schmidt. The receiver holds $3,083,639.75 in non-exempt funds seized in May 2025. While Virginia courts disbursed $1,140,004.66 in November 2025 covering principal and Virginia-incurred fees, the plaintiffs assert Texas-incurred enforcement costs remain unpaid. The motion chronicles defendant resistance tactics including unsuccessful removals to federal court (one resulting in sanctions), multiple failed motions, and appellate challenges. The receiver does not oppose the requested distribution.
Key Points
  • Receiver holds $3,083,639.75 seized from Cyberlux Corporation since June 2025
  • Virginia judgment of $1,572,500 entered June 23, 2023; $1,140,004.66 already disbursed via Virginia garnishment
  • Plaintiffs seek $857,734.19 for Texas enforcement costs separate from Virginia-awarded fees
  • Defendants deployed resistance tactics including two federal court removals (one sanctioned) and multiple unsuccessful appeals
  • Receiver does not oppose the motion for fee distribution
Stage 2
Core — Entities, Events, Claims
16 nodes
ENT-001
Entity
Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC
Plaintiff/Judgment-Creditor entity seeking enforcement of Virginia judgment and distribution of receivership funds in Texas proceedings.
Page 2, 5 — ATLANTIC WAVE HOLDINGS, LLC... Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors
ENT-002
Entity
Secure Community, LLC
Co-plaintiff/Judgment-Creditor entity jointly seeking enforcement of Virginia judgment.
Page 2, 5 — AND SECURE COMMUNITY, LLC Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors
ENT-003
Entity
Cyberlux Corporation
Defendant/Judgment-Debtor entity subject to receivership and judgment enforcement actions.
Page 2, 3 — CYBERLUX CORPORATION and MARK SCHMIDT, Individually, Defendants/Judgment-Debtors
ENT-004
Entity
Mark D. Schmidt
Individual defendant/judgment-debtor jointly liable with Cyberlux Corporation under the Virginia judgment.
Page 2 — CYBERLUX CORPORATION and MARK SCHMIDT, Individually, Defendants/Judgment-Debtors
ENT-005
Entity
Robert W. Berleth / Berleth & Associates, PLLC
Court-appointed receiver holding $3,083,639.75 in non-exempt Cyberlux funds, who does not oppose the distribution motion.
Page 4, 6 — Receiver Robert W. Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC, do not oppose the motion
EVT-001
Event
Virginia Underlying Judgment Entry
On June 23, 2023, Circuit Court of the City of Richmond, Virginia entered judgment in favor of plaintiffs against defendants for $1,572,500.00 principal plus costs, fees, and sanctions.
Page 2 — On June 23, 2023, a Virginia state court presiding over Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC v. Cyberlux Corporation and Mark D. Schmidt, Case No. CL22-3882-4, in the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond, State of Virginia, entered a Judgment (Underlying Judgment) in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants/Judgment-Debtors Cyberlux Corporation and Mark D. Schmidt (Defendants), in the principal sum of $1,572,500.00 plus costs, fees, and sanctions.
EVT-002
Event
Texas Enforcement Petition Filing
On July 30, 2024, plaintiffs filed a petition in Harris County, Texas to enforce the Virginia judgment.
Page 2 — On July 30 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Petition to Enforce the Underlying Judgment in this Court.
EVT-003
Event
Receivership Order Signing
On May 22, 2025, the Texas court signed an Order Appointing Receiver pursuant to Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 31.002(b)(3), directing the receiver to take possession of Cyberlux property, sell it, and pay proceeds to plaintiffs.
Page 2, 3 — on May 22, 2025, pursuant to Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 31.002(b)(3), this Court signed the Receivership Order. The Receivership Order appointed Receiver, among other duties and responsibilities, "to take possession of [Cyberlux Corporation] property, sell it, and pay the proceeds to [Plaintiffs] to the extent required to satisfy the judgment."
EVT-004
Event
Receiver Seizure of Funds
In June 2025, the receiver took possession of $3,083,639.75 in non-exempt funds of Cyberlux Corporation under the receivership order.
Page 3 — In June of 2025, over six months ago, Receiver took possession of $3,083,639.75 in non-exempt funds of Cyberlux Corporation under the Receivership Order.
EVT-005
Event
Virginia Garnishment Final Order
On November 14, 2025, the Circuit Court of Fairfax County, Virginia entered a Final Order directing disbursement of $952,601.71 for principal balance and $187,399.95 for Virginia attorneys' fees and costs.
Page 3 — In a contemporaneous garnishment proceeding in Virginia, on November 14, 2025, the Circuit Court of Fairfax County, Virginia in Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC v. Cyberlux Corporation, Case No. CL-2025-3413 entered its Final Order (Order) which, among other things, ordered the Virginia court clerk to disburse (1) $952,601.71, representing the principal balance owed on the Underlying Judgment;and (2) $187,399.95, representing Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in the Virginia state court proceedings.
EVT-006
Event
Virginia Disbursement to Plaintiffs
On November 18, 2025, $1,140,004.66 of garnished funds was disbursed to plaintiffs from the Virginia garnishment proceeding.
Page 3 — On November 18, 2025, $1,140,004.66 of the garnished funds was disbursed to Plaintiffs.
EVT-007
Event
Filing of Second Amended Distribution Motion
On January 6, 2026, plaintiffs filed their second amended motion seeking court approval for distribution of $857,734.19 from receivership funds for Texas enforcement costs.
Page 2, 5 — Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC (Plaintiffs) file this second amended motion seeking court approval for the distribution of non-exempt funds held by the Receiver... Dated: January 6, 2026.
CLM-001
Claim
Outstanding Texas Enforcement Fees
Plaintiffs claim they are owed at least $857,734.19 in reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in the Texas enforcement proceeding and related Texas proceedings.
Page 3 — Plaintiffs are owed at least $857,734.19 in reasonable attorneys' fees and cost in this Texas enforcement proceeding and the other related proceedings in Texas.
CLM-002
Claim
Statutory Entitlement to Fees
Under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 31.002(e) and the Settlement Agreement, plaintiffs claim entitlement to recover reasonable costs including attorney's fees.
Page 4 — Under section 31.002(e) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code and the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs are "entitled to recover reasonable costs, including attorney's fees."
CLM-003
Claim
Rohrmoos Ventures Elements Satisfied
Plaintiffs contend that the Rohrmoos Ventures elements have been satisfied for their claimed attorneys' fees and costs of $857,734.19.
Page 4 — Accordingly, Plaintiffs hereby contend that the Rohrmoos Ventures elements have been satisfied and that Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred and recoverable under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 31.002(e) (and the Settlement Agreement) are at least, $857,734.19
CLM-004
Claim
Jurisdictional Limitation on Virginia Fee Award
Plaintiffs assert that while the Virginia court ruled they were entitled to all costs and fees, the Virginia court only had jurisdiction to award costs and fees incurred in Virginia proceedings, leaving Texas enforcement fees outstanding.
Page 3 — While the Virginia state court ruled Plaintiffs are entitled to all costs and fees by statute and under the Settlement Agreement, the Virginia state court only had jurisdiction to award costs and fees incurred in the Virginia state court proceedings. As a result, Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this enforcement proceeding remain outstanding.
Stage 3
In Situ — Quotations, Tells, Tensions, Questions
8 nodes
TLL-001
Tell
Defendant Resistance Tactics Pattern
Document characterizes defendants' conduct as involving 'significant gamesmanship and litigation tactics' to avoid satisfying the judgment, including numerous unsuccessful motions, two unsuccessful federal court removals (one resulting in sanctions), and multiple unsuccessful appellate challenges.
Page 2, 3, 4 — After significant gamesmanship and litigation tactics deployed by Defendants to avoid satisfying the Underlying Judgment... For example, Defendants filed numerous unsuccessful motions in this Court, filed two unsuccessful removals to Texas federal court (one of which led to sanctions and an admonition being imposed against Defendants), and initiated and filed multiple unsuccessful challenges to the Court of Appeals, First District of Texas.
TLL-002
Tell
Receiver Non-Opposition
The receiver explicitly does not oppose the motion for distribution, indicating no dispute over the requested relief from the party holding the funds.
Page 6 — Receiver Robert W. Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC, do not oppose the motion.
TLL-003
Tell
Delay Narrative
Motion emphasizes temporal delay: receiver took possession over six months ago (June 2025), and defendants resisted satisfaction since the original June 2023 judgment, 'needlessly increasing interest accrued on the judgment as well as attorney fees and costs.'
Page 3 — In June of 2025, over six months ago, Receiver took possession of $3,083,639.75... Rather than satisfy the judgment in June of 2023, Defendants chose to resist, delay, and interfere with Plaintiffs' collection efforts needlessly increasing interest accrued on the judgment as well as attorney fees and costs incurred by Plaintiffs.
TEN-001
Tension
Multi-Jurisdictional Fee Allocation
Tension exists between Virginia and Texas jurisdictions regarding which court can award which categories of enforcement fees. Virginia awarded fees for its proceedings but disclaimed jurisdiction over Texas enforcement costs, creating separate claims in each forum.
Page 3 — While the Virginia state court ruled Plaintiffs are entitled to all costs and fees by statute and under the Settlement Agreement, the Virginia state court only had jurisdiction to award costs and fees incurred in the Virginia state court proceedings. As a result, Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this enforcement proceeding remain outstanding.
TEN-002
Tension
Scope Limitation Declaration
Motion explicitly limits its scope to liquidated damages of the underlying judgment, disclaiming resolution of the Stock Case, Interpleader Action, or other claims not specifically pleaded in this enforcement action.
Page 4 — This motion resolves the liquidated damages of the Underlying Judgment in this enforcement action. This motion does not resolve matters before the Richmond, Virginia, Circuit Court, Cause No. CL24003910 (Stock Case), the interpleader action before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division, Case 3:25-cv-00483 (Interpleader Action), or any other separate and distinct claims not specifically pleaded in this enforcement action.
QST-001
Question
Fee Documentation Provided to Receiver
What specific documentation was provided to the receiver, and what were the receiver's findings or determinations regarding the reasonableness of the $857,734.19 claimed?
Page 4 — Plaintiffs have provided to Receiver true and correct copies of the attorneys' fees and costs incurred by Plaintiffs in the Texas proceedings, and supporting attorney fee affidavits, for review and consideration, and Plaintiffs will proffer the same documents to the Court for in camera inspection if necessary.
QST-002
Question
Receivership Order Set-Off Provisions
What 'set offs as Receiver deems reasonable' were contemplated in paragraph 53 of the Receivership Order, and has the receiver determined any such set-offs apply to this distribution?
Page 3 — Paragraph 53 of the Receivership Order directs Receiver to pay the funds, after set offs as Receiver deems reasonable, to Plaintiffs within a reasonable time.
QST-003
Question
Settlement Agreement Terms
What are the specific fee-shifting provisions in the referenced Settlement Agreement, and how do they interact with the statutory fee entitlement under Texas law?
Page 4 — Under section 31.002(e) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code and the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs are "entitled to recover reasonable costs, including attorney's fees."
Stage 4
Interpretive — Inferences, Omissions, Patterns
5 nodes
INF-001
Inference
Federal Removal Sanctions as Resistance Evidence
The mention that one federal removal 'led to sanctions and an admonition being imposed against Defendants' suggests a judicial finding of improper conduct, supporting the plaintiffs' characterization of defendants' litigation strategy as obstructive.
Page 3, 4 — filed two unsuccessful removals to Texas federal court (one of which led to sanctions and an admonition being imposed against Defendants)
INF-002
Inference
Parallel Proceedings Strategic Context
The simultaneous pursuit of garnishment in Virginia and receivership in Texas, combined with the explicit disclaimer regarding the Stock Case and Interpleader Action, suggests a multi-forum enforcement strategy addressing different asset pools or legal claims.
Page 3, 4 — In a contemporaneous garnishment proceeding in Virginia... This motion does not resolve matters before the Richmond, Virginia, Circuit Court, Cause No. CL24003910 (Stock Case), the interpleader action before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division, Case 3:25-cv-00483 (Interpleader Action)
INF-003
Inference
Two-Business-Day Urgency Request
The request for disbursement 'within two business days' suggests plaintiffs perceive urgency or risk in delay, possibly relating to concerns about fund dissipation, competing claims, or time-sensitive enforcement needs.
Page 5 — respectfully ask that this Court order Receiver Robert W. Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC, to disburse $857,734.19 to Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC, within two business days of entry of this Court's order.
OMI-001
Omission
Defendant Response Absent
No response or opposition from defendants is mentioned in the certificate of conference or elsewhere. The certificate only confirms receiver non-opposition, leaving defendants' position on the fee claim unaddressed.
Page 6 — counsel for Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC, conferred with Receiver Robert W. Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC, about the relief requested in and the merits of this motion. Receiver Robert W. Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC, do not oppose the motion.
OMI-002
Omission
Fee Calculation Methodology Unspecified
While the motion claims $857,734.19 in fees and references supporting affidavits provided to the receiver, no breakdown of this amount by time period, proceeding, or attorney rate is provided in the motion itself.
Page 3, 4 — Plaintiffs are owed at least $857,734.19 in reasonable attorneys' fees and cost in this Texas enforcement proceeding and the other related proceedings in Texas... Plaintiffs have provided to Receiver true and correct copies of the attorneys' fees and costs incurred by Plaintiffs in the Texas proceedings, and supporting attorney fee affidavits

Extracted text

6 pages · 7727 characters

Exhibit 14 — Formatted Extract

Type: exhibit
Court: EDVA
Matter: HII v. Cyberlux interpleader
Docket: 3:25-cv-00483
EXHIBIT 14

Page 2 of 6 PageID# 2815 16/2026 6:47 PM Marilyn Burgess - District Clerk Harris County Envelope No. 109732259 By: Shanelle Taylor Filed: 1/6/2026 6:47 PM

CAUSE NO. 2024-48085

ATLANTIC WAVE HOLDINGS, LLC §

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

AND SECURE COMMUNITY, LLC Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors, §

§

§

129th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

V. CYBERLUX CORPORATION and MARK §

§ §

SCHMIDT, Individually, Defendants/Judgment-Debtors. §

§

HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED MOTION FOR DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS

Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC (Plaintiffs) file this second amended motion seeking court approval for the distribution of non- exempt funds held by the Receiver under the Order Appointing Receiver (Receivership Order), signed on May 22, 2025.

I. INTRODUCTION

On June 23, 2023, a Virginia state court presiding over Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC v. Cyberlux Corporation and Mark D. Schmidt, Case No. CL22-3882-4, in the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond, State of Virginia, entered a Judgment (Underlying Judgment) in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants/Judgment-Debtors Cyberlux Corporation and Mark D. Schmidt (Defendants), in the principal sum of $1,572,500.00 plus costs, fees, and sanctions.

On July 30 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Petition to Enforce the Underlying Judgment in this Court. After significant gamesmanship and litigation tactics deployed by Defendants to avoid satisfying the Underlying Judgment, on May 22, 2025, pursuant to Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 31.002(b)(3), this Court signed the Receivership Order. The Receivership Order appointed Receiver, among other duties and responsibilities, "to take possession of [Cyberlux

Corporation] property, sell it, and pay the proceeds to [Plaintiffs] to the extent required to satisfy the judgment."

In June of 2025, over six months ago, Receiver took possession of $3,083,639.75 in non- exempt funds of Cyberlux Corporation under the Receivership Order. Paragraph 53 of the Receivership Order directs Receiver to pay the funds, after set offs as Receiver deems reasonable, to Plaintiffs within a reasonable time.

In a contemporaneous garnishment proceeding in Virginia, on November 14, 2025, the Circuit Court of Fairfax County, Virginia in Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC v. Cyberlux Corporation, Case No. CL-2025-3413 entered its Final Order (Order) which, among other things, ordered the Virginia court clerk to disburse (1) $952,601.71, representing the principal balance owed on the Underlying Judgment;and (2) $187,399.95, representing Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in the Virginia state court proceedings. On November 18, 2025, $1,140,004.66 of the garnished funds was disbursed to Plaintiffs. While the Virginia state court ruled Plaintiffs are entitled to all costs and fees by statute and under the Settlement Agreement, the Virginia state court only had jurisdiction to award costs and fees incurred in the Virginia state court proceedings. As a result, Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this enforcement proceeding remain outstanding.

Plaintiffs are øwed at least $857,734.19 in reasonable attorneys' fees and cost in this Texas enforcement proceeding and the other related proceedings in Texas. Rather than satisfy the judgment in June of 2023, Defendants chose to resist, delay, and interfere with Plaintiffs' collection efforts needlessly increasing interest accrued on the judgment as well as attorney fees and costs incurred by Plaintiffs. For example, Defendants filed numerous unsuccessful motions in this Court, filed two unsuccessful removals to Texas federal court (one of which led to sanctions

and an admonition being imposed against Defendants), and initiated and filed multiple unsuccessful challenges to the Court of Appeals, First District of Texas.

II. ARGUMENT

This motion resolves the liquidated damages of the Underlying Judgment in this enforcement action. This motion does not resolve matters before the Richmond, Virginia, Circuit Court, Cause No. CL24003910 (Stock Case), the interpleader action before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond Division, Case 3:25-cv-00483 (Interpleader Action), or any other separate and distinct claims not specifically pleaded in this enforcement action.

Under section 31.002(e) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code and the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs are "entitled to recover reasonable costs, including attorney's fees." Plaintiffs have provided to Receiver true and correct copies of the attorneys' fees and costs incurred by Plaintiffs in the Texas proceedings, and supporting attorney fee affidavits, for review and consideration, and Plaintiffs will proffer the same documents to the Court for in camera inspection if necessary. Accordingly, Plaintiffs hereby contend that the Rohrmoos Ventures elements have been satisfied and that Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred and recoverable under Tex. Ci@Prac. & Rem. Code § 31.002(e) (and the Settlement Agreement) are at least, $857,734.19 and further contends that Receiver should promptly pay $857,734.19 to Plaintiffs from the $3,083,639.75 in non-exempt funds currently held by Receiver under the Receivership Order.

III. CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC, respectfully ask that this Court order Receiver Robert W. Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC, to disburse $857,734.19 to Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC, within two business days of entry of this Court's order.

Dated: January 6, 2026.

Unofficial Copy Office of Marilyn central Nuth District Clark,

By: /s/ Daniel A. Ardmore Daniel A Ardmore Texas Bar No. 24142224 ardmorelawfirm@gmail.com Ardmore Law Firm, PLLC. 20333 State Highway 249, Suite 200 Houston, TX 77070 Tel. (832) 930-1116

James K. Sadigh Texas Bar No. 24129140 jamessadigh@aol.com Attorney at Law 9777 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 400 Beverly Hills, CA 90212-1910 Tel. (310) 747-5919

David A. Walton Texas Bar No. 24042120 dwalton@bellnunnally.com Bell Nunnally & Martin, LLP 2323 Ross Avenue, Suite 1900 Dallas, Texas 75201 Tel. (214) 740-1445

Attorneys for Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC, and Secure Community, LLC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on January 6, 2026, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served on all parties of record via electronic service from the court's ECF system for registered users, in accordance with Rule 21a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

By: /s/ Daniel A. Ardmore Daniel A. Ardmore

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I certify that on January 5, 2026, counsel for Plaintiffs/Judgment-Creditors Atlantic Wave Holdings, LLC and Secure Community, LLC, conferred with Receiver Robert W. Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC, about the relief requested in and the merits of this motion. Receiver Robert W. Berleth and Berleth & Associates, PLLC, do not oppose the motion.

By: /s/ Daniel Ardmore /s/ James Sadigh Daniel A. Ardmore & James Sadigh :selected:

Unofficial Copy Office of Marilyn Bufetsmotrict Clerk

Original source file

No source file is attached yet. The record is ready for the PDF/media link when the attachment importer is connected.
File
ip-hii-edva-00483-doc-0175-exhibit-16.pdf
Source UID
source:dca49912ce86ad6647919ba9b2fa035d1a4cfe04a13ee0bfac38f43e72ce5f9d
Full SHA-256
dca49912ce86ad6647919ba9b2fa035d1a4cfe04a13ee0bfac38f43e72ce5f9d