A few days ago I wrote here about a lawsuit and consent order that were filed in Baltimore, Maryland, determining that a series of criticisms posted against Georgia dentist Mitul Patel by Matthew Chan, one of his patients in Georgia, were false and defamatory, and commanding their removal from the web and from search engine listings.
Over the weekend I got a call from Patel’s lawyer insisting on a retraction of that blog post; he followed up with a demand letter. Patel’s counsel, a lawyer whose blog suggests that he specializes in representing dentists, admits that the lawsuit was a fraudulent proceeding, while insisting that it was his client that is the main victim of the fraud, because Patel never authorized the lawsuit, had nothing to do with it, did not even know about the suit until I published my blog article, and yet has had his reputation affected by the fact that Patel’s name is on the complaint as plaintiff. Patel’s lawyer promises that his client intends to seek damages from the person or company that filed the proceeding, as well as pursuing the possibility that the filing was a crime.
Patel's lawyer demanded that I publish his demand letter here, which I am happy to do, and I share the desire to identify the miscreant that filed this lawsuit. But I find some of Patel’s claims of innocence to be suspect. My response to Patel’s demand letter identifies multiple reasons to question the veracity of Patel's claim that he knew nothing about the lawsuit before I published my article on Friday. Most important, Yelp received emails from one of Patel’s confirmed email addresses, seeking to take advantage of the existence of the consent order to get Chan’s review taken down. Unless the email address was spoofed, this certainly suggests that even if Patel was not involved in obtaining the fraudulent order, he had no compunction about taking advantage of that order. I will be waiting to hear from Patel’s counsel whether Patel disavows these emails and claims that his email address was spoofed.
My letter raises the possibility that perhaps Patel retained a reputation management outfit to perform SEO miracles on Patel’s behalf, and that such a company might have perpetrated this fraud in pursuit of that assignment, while giving Patel deniability by not burdening him with knowledge of the sordid details. In a subsequent conversation, Patel’s lawyer admitted to me that Patel did hire such a company, but he refused to identify it, saying that he needed to pursue further investigation about who it is that is responsible for the fraudulent Maryland filings.
Stay tuned.
Hello James L. Smith,
In response to your comment, I agree with you there is probably some criminal element at play here and there probably needs to be an investigation by someone in law enforcement to uncover the truth.
Matthew Chan
Hello David Schwartz,
In response to your post, if you read Mr. Levy’s accounting of events, it APPEARS to me that Stuart Oberman, Patel’s lawyer, was brought in with little notice and/or preparation. He probably only had Patel’s word to go on initially. Mr. Oberman stated in his letter that he will be conducting an investigation and I am inclined to believe him. But I am disappointed that he would not reveal the identity of the SEO/reputation management firm to Mr. Levy. Perhaps he will change his mind later on.
We can only hope Mr. Oberman will report back to Mr. Levy his findings so the true perpetrator can be determined and found. If Patel was not the perpetrator of the court filing, I can accept that. However, I am not prepared to accept that Patel had ZERO role in all this.
I think it is safe to say MANY PEOPLE simply want the truth of the matter and get to the bottom of this scheme that has been uncovered.
To quote Mr. Levy, “Stay tuned”.
Matthew Chan
My money says Dr. Mitul Patel’s DNA and fingerprints are all over that fraudulent Baltimore lawsuit. Distancing himself from the fraud reminds me of check forgers who induce someone else to forge the check, and then utter it, hoping to escape criminal liability.
I got a feeling there’s a criminal conspiracy in which the parties were Patel and some sleazy characters operating a clean-up-your-bad-internet-reputation scam.
If this is indeed what happened, the FBI needs to act, and act fast. A cancer like this will spread like wildfire.
Is it typical for a letter demanding action on the basis of extraordinary claims to provide no evidence whatsoever for them? There isn’t even a signed statement from Dr. Patel. If I honestly expected someone to act on this letter I would have included an affidavit from Dr. Patel and a copy of the notice I sent to the Court alerting them to the fraud.
If he gave the SEO scum access to his email account, he could have no knowledge of the email, yet his account would not be spoofed.