Do Mark Noss & Steven Ingersoll Share Six-Figure Annual IVL Curriculum Royalties?
Federal Government Records Reveals Both Hold Copyright For Pioneering 1993 Diagnostic & Treatment Techniques Manual!
An order filed late yesterday afternoon granting Steven Ingersoll a third trial delay revealed the government has rejected the defense's description of the missing Grand Traverse Academy millions as “loans”, instead terming the flow of money into Ingersoll's personal accounts as “embezzlement” .
The order confirms that Ingersoll's twice-delayed federal fraud trial is set to begin on February 10, 2015. US District Judge Thomas L. Ludington set January 26, 2015 as the final pretrial conference, and ordered the parties to submit proposed jury instructions no later than December 19, 2014.
In the first installment of a three-part series, Miss Fortune examines the motion and reveals more startling information about the government's case — and Steven Ingersoll's continuing financial link to both Mark Noss and the Grand Traverse Academy.
Ingersoll's fraud trial had been set for December 2, 2014, and on October 31, 2014, Ingersoll filed a motion to adjourn that trial date.
The motion was denied on November 6, 2014, with Ludington concluding that an adjournment was not warranted based on Ingersoll's “generic assertions that additional time is needed.” However, Ludington acknowledged that “if Defendants provide specific information detailing how the financial records are more complex than they initially appear, an adjournment may be warranted.”
On November 13, 2014, Ingersoll filed a motion for reconsideration, again requesting that the trial date be adjourned. In his November 13 motion, Ingersoll explained that his retained expert, forensic accountant David J. Hammel, needed an additional 60 days to review the transactions that comprise Counts 6 and 7 of the superseding indictment for tax evasion.
During a hearing on November 18, 2014, Ingersoll's defense explained why Hammel needed additional time, beginning with an explanation of the relationship between Ingersoll and the corporate entities the government alleges to be involved in the “transactions at issue”.
Steven Ingersoll owns and controls both Smart Schools Management, Inc. (“SSM”), a C corporation, and Smart Schools, Incorporated (“SSI”), an S corporation.
NOTE: “C” corporation refers to any corporation that, under United States federal income tax law, is taxed separately from its owners. A C corporation is distinguished from an S corporation, which generally is not taxed separately. Most major companies (and many smaller companies) are treated as C corporations for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
A member of Ingersoll's defense team was quoted in the December 3 order stating “SSI holds the copyright for the school curriculum developed by Ingersoll. SSI licenses that curriculum to SSM, which pays between $100,000 and $200,000 per year for a license for the use of the curriculum.”
It appears that statement may be misleading.
A check of official United States Copyright Office records (results shown above) reveals that Mark Noss and Steven Ingersoll are both named as copyright holders for the 1993 text titled “Integrated vision therapy” — not SSI. (An advanced search of official government copyright records returned no results for either Smart Schools, Inc. or Smart Schools Management, Inc.)
Ingersoll and Noss are partners in the Traverse City-based Excel Institute, and current Academy Board member, Macomb County optometrist Danna Haba, offers vision therapy services at the Excel Institute of Shelby.
It appears that former Superintendent Kaye Mentley may have been deceptive back in April. So, is Steven Ingersoll still receiving those six-figure licensing payments from the Grand Traverse Academy?
And, more to the point, has Mark Noss received any of that IVL licensing money for the program he and Ingersoll developed that's served as the basis for the Grand Traverse Academy's curriculum since the school opened its doors in 2000?
Or how about the Bay City Academy?
Or Modesto, California's Great Valley Academy?
I don't know...but I'd sure like to find out.
COMING TOMORROW: PART 2
LOAN OR EMBEZZLEMENT?
If he goes and robs a bank, and I go, can I borrow that money from you, it’s still proceeds of the bank robbery. It’s still an illegal act, and I don’t know any way that you can just put the label “loan” on it and make it into an innocent transaction when it’s a transaction that is—or a series of transactions that are conducted without authority using state funds.