Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

New Complaint – Andersen, et al. v. Gigapix Studios, Inc.

By Jenny Yi on February 10, 2022
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Andersen, et al. v. Gigapix Studios, Inc. was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento on January 13, 2022 seeking civil damages for claims of fraud and misrepresentation.

Plaintiffs are a group of individuals who invested in Defendant Gigapix Studios, Inc. (“Gigapix”).  Gigapix is an animation company that solicited investors by advertising that it would generate large profits from prospective projects.

Plaintiffs allege that Gigapix was founded by Christopher Blauvelt and led by David Pritchard, who purchased investor lead lists and hired telemarketers to solicit potential investors.  Investors were told that Gigapix was an animation company on the verge of an initial public offering or reverse merger with a public company that would net high returns for investors.  In reality, however, Plaintiffs allege that Gigapix was a Ponzi scheme that materially misrepresented the funds that would be spent on producing shows and movies, the anticipated timing of returns on investment, the level of risk involved, and the success of prior Gigapix projects.

As investors signed subscription agreements and submitted their investment funds, Blauvelt and Pritchard purportedly used those funds to pay their own and employees’ salaries, personal expenses, commissions to their investor marketing team, and to solicit additional investors.  Through this Ponzi scheme, Gigapix allegedly raised over $22 million from 750 investors.  The scheme eventually caught the attention of the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, and Blauvelt and Pritchard were indicted and sentenced on separate criminal charges in United States of America v. David Pritchard, Christopher Blauvelt, et al.

Plaintiffs allege that they were involved in the criminal case and cooperated with the U.S. Attorney in order to recover their losses as part of the restitution process, but were ultimately denied restitution.  Based on these allegations, Plaintiffs assert a single claim for fraud and misrepresentation against Gigapix for general and special damages.

Photo of Jenny Yi Jenny Yi

Jenny focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation, advising corporate clients in a wide variety of litigation matters. Jenny has experience litigating matters involving high-risk consumer class actions, Ponzi schemes, civil conspiracies, contract, tort, statutory, and related business claims. She handles all aspects…

Jenny focuses her practice on complex commercial litigation, advising corporate clients in a wide variety of litigation matters. Jenny has experience litigating matters involving high-risk consumer class actions, Ponzi schemes, civil conspiracies, contract, tort, statutory, and related business claims. She handles all aspects of state and federal litigation including discovery, settlement, pleadings, dispositive motions and trial.

Read more about Jenny YiEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Business and Commercial
  • Blog:
    Ponzi Perspectives
  • Organization:
    McGuireWoods LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo