u/maplenew60

Given all the strikes against his videos and account, it looks like the peptide video was the last straw and his channel might actually be gone for good (not just banned for a week)

Expectedly Frank is suing YouTube. What a shocker....

One thing I find hilarious, Frank wants 10k per day or his YouTube account back. WTF he admitted that he makes like $200 a month from YouTube because he is shadow banned and he wants 10k per day?

Frank2fano is Frank's second channel that he used to livestream before.

But more interestingly, in the video, Frank admits he got a guideline strike approx 4 years when he made videos about his business partner. I'm also pretty sure that he got a second guideline strike when he made videos about his protein bar being stolen and accusing Jake Levy of some horrific things.

I'm assuming he got a third strike for the peptides video. It will be interesting to see if Frank's channel is done for good

Good old Frank getting on the peptide bandwagon like all the other shills. Give him a few months and he will start selling fentanyl

I might have missed this but it's kinda scary that Frank confessed that he got these peptides from a manufacturer but doesn't reveal the actual manufacturer or any sort of lab analysis certificate etc.

Is Frank finally going to do it? Or is he just whining again for attention and sympathy?

Frank always rants about how high quality and local his products are and how you are supporting local businesses/Amish farmers if you buy from him

I guess Vegan Gains was right. Frank's meat is definitely local to some where (if you lived in AUS and NZ).

I think this short is in response to a livestream where someone asked what gives Frank the medical expertise, experience, qualifications and knowledge to talk about medical surgeries such as limb lengthening etc. Frank then went on a huge rant how he did a lot of medical research and people are copying and censoring him (the usual Frank Tufano rant)

I don't support limb lengthening as a surgery but it's hilarious to see Frank attempt to portray himself as some sort of medical expert. And his only qualifications are Google AI and 'I'm a butcher'

At least bring up some medical studies about side effects of limb lengthening or even amputees who have certain limbs removed.

We all know Frank love suing small businesses for copying his ideas, market manipulation, illegal pricing etc etc blah blah blah

But why does Frank never sue the actual big dogs? Proctor and Gamble, Unilever and Loreal are selling a lot more products, use crap chemical ingredients and they actually control a huge market share where most people are buying something belonging to these Freemason corporations.

It's like Frank always complains about the billionaires controlling the world and maliciously harassing him. But won't do anything to billionaires who can actually punch him back so he targets random businesses that went viral on Tiktok

I think Frank should start suing girls for only dating chads. They are clearly discriminating against short and ugly people like Frank

Frank is the poorest rich person I have ever seen. He is always crying about being broke and even begged for donations but never seems to run out of money.

It's also hilarious that Frank is literally admitting that he caused all the damage to his roof.

He clearly states that he willingly paid for roof work which meant ripping up the entire roof but the contractors he hired either scammed him or Frank didn't pay enough and they walked off. Then the winter season hit and his exposed roof caused massive damage to his house. Now Frank is suing everyone under the sun for over 100k because of self caused weather damage

But I'm sure all the contractors are actually part of the Freemasons and is gangstalking Frank

Excerpt from the Judgement

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2)(C) requires for “non-retained” experts, such as Plaintiff’s percipient doctor witnesses, disclosures that state:

(i) the subject matter on which the witness is expected to present evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, 703, or 705; and

(ii) a summary of the facts and opinions to which the witness is expected to testify.”

This disclosure must be made “at least 90 days before the date set for trial”—in this case, April 15, 2026. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(D)(i). Although Plaintiff indicated in his discovery plan an intention that his percipient witness would offer expert testimony, Plaintiff never served Defendant a disclosure containing the facts and opinions about which the witnesses would testify.

Certainly, the short descriptions contained in Plaintiff’s initial disclosures cannot constitute the “summary of the facts and opinions” the rule requires. See Exhibit A at 2, ECF No. 129-2.

Rule 37(c)(1) imposes an automatic exclusion sanction for undisclosed expert testimony where a noncompliant party has not shown that the failure to disclose was either substantially justified or harmless

Glad to know that Frank takes surgery advice from a random emails and a bunch of random strangers on looksmaxxing forums.

Frank's mustn't have researched very hard during those 2 years because a simple Google search will tell you that orbital decompression is not a cosmetic surgery. I don't know if Taban or Frank was the one who insisted on the surgery but anyone with brain knows any surgery around the eyes is extremely risky

I bet you all the 'research' Frank did was look at some looksmaxxing forums instead of any medical journal articles etc. If Frank wanted to truly looksmax, he should just get limb lengthening

I was able to find this case after asking Chatgpt and this video proves Frank understands nothing about the law or how the court system works (I do preface that Chagpt may not be accurate and the below might all be a hallucination) . Even if his lawsuits have legitimate claims, the fact he doesn't hire a lawyer to follow proper legal and court processes is causing all his cases to be dismissed

I'm not a US lawyer but wanted to express some points I found interesting after briefly reading the case. We know Frank follows this sub reddit so who knows, maybe he learns something.

1. Frank repeatedly brings up his amendment right that he is entitled to a jury trial regardless of literally anything that happens or any issues with his filings or legal claims. In his mind, the moment he files a lawsuit, he is entitled to a jury trial.

Frank stated that “any rulings in this action should not be considered before evidence is presented to a jury.” The judge responded - A jury decides the facts, not the law. To get to a jury, a plaintiff must first present cognizable, plausible legal claims.

This makes perfect sense in the mind of any sane person. The Court must first determine whether a case is legally viable before it proceeds to trial. You can't just file a bogus lawsuit against someone and expect to drag people in for a jury trial. In this case, all defendants motions to dismiss were granted.

Inherently, Frank seems to misinterpret the amendment rights in the USA. For example, Frank claims its his freedom of speech to slander Saladino and call him a child abuser. It's fine as long as it's true in Frank's mind. This has never been correct and who knows where Frank got the idea he can say literally anything about anyone with no repercussions.

2. Frank frequently files lawsuits in the Pennsylvania jurisdiction (who knows, maybe this court recognises that Frank is poor and waived his filing fees) regardless if it's the right forum to bring forward the particular lawsuit. For example, he sued Taban in Pennsylvania even thought California was the proper forum.

Frank argued that the overall business transaction had connections to Pennsylvania and that Pennsylvania was the final destination of the product. Whether or not each individual business involved is incorporated and operates in the specific state of final destination is completely unreasonable. Mind you, this is just Frank ranting and not rooted in any law.

The defendants argued lack of jurisdiction, namely: they did not engage in any activity in or directed to Pennsylvania with respect to the shipment of beef.

They are not registered to do business in Pennsylvania, does not have any employees in Pennsylvania, and does not maintain an office in Pennsylvania. This was proved by affidavit evidence from each defendant.

The Judge advised Frank a reasonableness argument alone is insufficient to defeat the defendants motion. The burden of demonstrating the facts that establish personal jurisdiction falls on the plaintiff, and once a defendant has raised a jurisdictional defense, the plaintiff must prove by affidavits or other competent evidence that jurisdiction is proper. Frank need only establish a prima facie case of personal jurisdiction and is entitled to have his allegations taken as true and all factual disputes drawn in his favor.

Thats all Frank needed to do. Affidavit evidence that proves, on the face of the case, that personal jurisdiction is proper. Frank couldn't even be bothered to do that. He just kept ranting about the location of his business.

Sorry for the long post, just my thoughts and hopefully Frank reads this and actually hiress a lawyer.