A filing is not a verdict. Nothing on this site is a finding of liability.
The Record — theasbaghirecord.com. A filing is not a verdict. Nothing on this site is a finding of liability.
Section 02c
Two Dubai Courts instruments on 24 October 2024, thirty-three minutes apart. The first names her son for inquiry. The second names two UAE advocates for lawsuits, settlement, and estate banking. Counsel paper then names recovery and states a Scope of Work of approximately $4 billion. Investigator stills of FAB and Emirates NBD print very large dirham balances; the figures are covered. Dubai Islamic Bank denied a December notice. A Chase notice prints a $25,000 outgoing wire. A 10 February 2025 Horizons & Co invoice billed to her names a notarisation matter as POA revocation. The bill does not say which of the two instruments. That is a billed matter, not a Courts instrument. The live caption can test whether she honored the inquiry paper.
Two Tehran windows sit on the 1999 room. This room holds two Dubai Courts instruments from the same afternoon. They are not those Tehran offices. Printed FAB and Emirates NBD balances stay off this page. Passports, Emirates IDs, and account numbers are on the faces. Read it next to Who is Farideh Kavesh, Pathobiology Laboratory Center, and the live caption.
1 · The instrument
SN2024/0000439284. Request 2024/438284. Deed 1/2024/1258657. Signature timestamp 24-10-2024, 14:08:03. Writer of justice Shaimaa Ahmad Shaaban. Digital authentication. What these powers actually say matters more than the recovery story that follows.
Documented · the parties
Both named American. Passport type prints. The numbers are on the face. Signature timestamp 24-10-2024, 14:08:03, under her name as principal numbered 1. A second instrument, thirty-three minutes later, names two other people.
Documented · the powers
The Central Bank. All banks inside the state. Her registered personal accounts. View. Statements. Loans, facilities, guarantees. Certificates of discharge. Signatures that enable that inspection. Copies. A power to inspect is not a printed power to redirect the balance. A later claim that her lawyer called this a full power of attorney waits for that writing.
2 · The same afternoon
SN2024/0000438514. Request 2024/438514. Deed 1/2024/1263534. Signature timestamp 24-10-2024, 14:40:57. Writer of justice Salim Yaqut Salim. Issued the next day, 25 October 2024. Header: a general power of attorney in lawsuits. Passport and Emirates ID numbers are on the face. The names stay, because they are the point.
Documented · the clock
At 14:08 she named her son for inquiry. At 14:40 she named Marwan Mohamed Ahmed Noor Al-Mazmi and Ammar Ali Ahmed Ali Al-Mulla for lawsuits, settlement, and estate banking. Different serials, different notaries, different agents, different powers. Keep both. Those two Courts papers do not print a revocation of the first. A later Horizons invoice uses that word as a billed notarisation matter. Keep the distinction.
Conflict · two mandates
UAE agency paper limits a special mandate to the acts it names. A general mandate is administration and preservation. Settlement, waiver, admission, and arbitration take special authority. The 14:08 paper names inquiry. The 14:40 paper is titled general in lawsuits and also names those special acts, plus opening and closing estate bank accounts and withdrawing funds. Two authenticated instruments can stand together. They are not the same grant.
Documented · who she named
Dubai Islamic Bank’s 6 January 2025 letter is addressed to Marwan Mohamed Advocates and legal consultants. This face names Marwan Mohamed Ahmed Noor Al-Mazmi. That is a name on both papers. It is not a finding he filed the 9 December notice. Ammar Ali Ahmed Ali Al-Mulla is the second named agent. Public directories list an Ammar Almulla as a Dubai advocate. That is a name match, not an identity finding on this page. Agents may act jointly or separately and may substitute.
Context · what the second paper reaches
Appear and plead. Police, public prosecutions, immigration committees. Appeal and cassation. Settlement, waiver, reconciliation, arbitration, admission. Open an estate file. Inventory. Transfer inherited property. Sell and buy estate shares. Mortgage. Open and close bank accounts in the estate’s name. Withdraw funds. Receive and cash checks. That is broader than inquiry. It is still not a finding those accounts moved.
3 · The banks
Twelve days before the two instruments, a mail still puts an inactivity story to Dubai Islamic Bank. On 6 January 2025 the bank’s legal department denied a later notice, without prejudice, and asked for evidence. The addressee is Marwan Mohamed Advocates — the same surname as the first named agent on the 14:40 paper. First Abu Dhabi Bank and Emirates NBD are named on the counsel paper. Their own letters are not in this folder.
4 · The bank stills
Two photographs of bank screens exist. First Abu Dhabi Bank, issued 21 August 2024, prints a current-balance line dated 18 July 2018. Emirates NBD, captured 5 February 2025, prints a statement from 17 November 2017. Both balances are very large. Both figures are covered. A third still of the ENBD chrome, 29 July 2024, prints BANK ACCOUNT WITHOUT ACCESS ALLOWED. Account numbers and IBANs are on those faces. These are investigator stills, not stamped statements. King & Spalding later wrote approximately $4 billion across three banks as a Scope of Work. That dollar figure is counsel stating the claimed scope on an unsigned engagement. It is not a reprint of these screens. Dubai Islamic Bank has a denial in this room, not a balance face.
5 · Counsel
On 6 December 2024 King & Spalding addressed him as the client and wrote a Scope of Work of approximately $4 billion — DIB, FAB, Emirates NBD, inactivity, funds said to sit at the Central Bank. The countersignature on this face is blank. KYC is a gate on that face. On 12 December a draft invoice in her name prints the $100,000 split. On 17–18 December he signs a recovery contract as her agent. DIB’s January letter is addressed to Marwan Mohamed Advocates. The 14:40 instrument names Marwan Mohamed Ahmed Noor Al-Mazmi. That is a name on both faces. It is not a finding he signed the 9 December notice. King & Spalding still names him as the client. The recovery contract still has him signing as agent. A later claim that every person in this stretch was brought in by her is partly on this paper — she appointed those two advocates — and is not a finding she retained King & Spalding or the consultant.
Conflict · two faces
The 14:08 Courts paper authorizes inspection. The services agreement authorizes work to move funds to the customer’s desired accounts. The inquiry instrument does not say transfer.
Documented · the fee
Twenty-five percent on signing. Twenty-five percent on approvals and transfer requests. Fifty percent on recovered funds. A 0.22 percent success bonus if recovered on or before 10 January 2025. The first twenty-five percent is the Chase wire below. The 12 December still still prints Draft.
6 · The wire
Same kind of U.S. bank notice as the 2017 family-loan wire. Sender Hooman Asbaghi — his U.S. account, not a UAE bank face in this folder. Recipient a NAMUS collection vehicle. Recipient bank Zand Bank, Dubai. Date on the notice: 10 January 2025, four days after DIB’s denial, twenty-three days after he signed as agent, and the last day of the 0.22 percent bonus window. The contract said twenty-five percent upon signing. Street, phone, and IBAN are on the face. Amount stays.
6b · Horizons & Co
Invoice 39435. Horizons & Co. Bill to Kavish Farideh. Kind Attn Mrs. Kavish Farideh. The email on the face is Hooman.Asbaghi@mmimedical.com. Billing partner Adv. Ali Al Zarouni. Client code KF007. Case/Matter Details prints POA revocation- Mrs. Kavish Farideh. Type: Notarization. Case No N/A. Professional fee 3,333.33 AED plus 5 percent VAT, total 3,500.00. Tel No 0016192181395. Account 1006114431. IBAN AE230230000001006114431. The 3,500 dirhams is a notarisation charge, not a bank-account balance.
The 24 October Courts instruments still do not themselves print a revocation. This invoice, thirty-one days after the Chase wire and five weeks before the caption, is the first paper in this room that uses that word. An invoice is a billed matter. It does not name the 14:08 paper or the 14:40 paper. It is not a finding either October grant was withdrawn. Whether either grant is still in force after this invoice is not shown. It is not a finding who instructed Horizons. That the bill revoked the 14:08 paper, the 14:40 paper, or either, is not on the invoice.
7 · The suit
The live caption is Asbaghi vs Asbaghi, San Diego Superior Court, 25CU01380C, filed 17 March 2025. One question that caption can test is whether she honored the 24 October 2024 inquiry paper. The complaint is not republished here. The calendar on this room is: two instruments that afternoon, King & Spalding in December, DIB’s denial in January, the $25,000 wire four days later, a Horizons notarisation invoice in February billed as POA revocation, the caption in March. Non-recovery after an inquiry instrument is circumstantial. It is not itself a finding of breach. The same-afternoon grant to two advocates is on the file. The Horizons invoice is a billed matter. It does not name which of the two 24 October instruments. Neither face is a Dubai Courts revocation.
8 · The laboratory
Pathobiology Laboratory Center is her public Tehran laboratory — vice-chair and CEO on gazette paper, ISO 9001 on the wall, a contracted-institutions grid that prints the Central Bank of Iran, Armed Forces medical services, Iran Air, Social Security, major banks. That is magnitude as they printed it. Large UAE figures get claimed as compensation from Padtan Elm against that backdrop. Overlap of a laboratory and a banking claim is not a finding those UAE accounts are laboratory proceeds.
9 · The originals
18 February 2026
Kavan Bakhda wrote on 18 February 2026 that he and Chris had spoken that morning with Mr Drahmoune of Fotis Law. Mishcon de Reya’s stated reading: the power of attorney is investigative. Bakhda recorded Drahmoune as saying the Fotis instrument gave Hooman access and full authority to operate the accounts, and that Drahmoune would send that paper and mark the clause. The signed confirmation Drahmoune offered is not in this file. No later writing from Fotis Law or from Drahmoune is in this file.
