Authorization To Release Information Privacy Statement: Disclosure Of The Social Sec: Fill & Download for Free

Without question, 9/11. And it had nothing to do with wars or loss of life.Without trivializing those who died and their loved ones, the biggest loss suffered as a result of 9/11 was or loss of liberty. Specifically, The Patriot Act.Hastily passed 45 days after 9/11 in the name of national security, The Patriot Act was the first of many changes to surveillance laws that made it easier for the government to spy on ordinary Americans by expanding the authority to monitor phone and email communications, collect bank and credit reporting records, and track the activity of innocent Americans on the Internet. While most Americans think it was created to catch terrorists, the Patriot Act actually turns regular citizens into suspects.Eighteen years ago, President George W. Bush signed into law the most sweeping, publicly acknowledged domestic surveillance authority in American history. Enacted six weeks after the 9/11 attacks and over the vehement objections and warnings of civil libertarians, the bill passed the Senate 98–1 and the House 357–66.In a press release issued the same day, the bill’s author, Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), said that“This legislation gives law enforcement greater tools to aggressively find those who have and would terrorize innocent Americans and freedom-loving people everywhere. The PATRIOT Act takes off the kid gloves with terrorists by removing unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles that have hindered law enforcement’s efforts against new and dangerous enemies lurking in the shadows. This is achieved without discarding our civil liberty protections that makes our country unique and great.”In reality, the bill had been rushed through Congress before any 9/11 inquiry had commenced, much less concluded. Congress had yet to investigate why the attacks had succeeded in the first place. Thus, the PATRIOT Act was a solution to a problem that remained unexamined at the time it became law.Within three years of its enactment, two separate national reports—one by Congress, the other by the 9/11 Commission—would conclude that it was not a lack of data, but a lack of focused intelligence analysis and dissemination that impeded the intelligence community from detecting the terrorist plot. The PATRIOT Act’s constitutionally compromised, data-centric approach was, and remains, the wrong solution for preventing future attacks.Indeed, in the nearly 20 years since it became law, it has become clear that none of the 160 provisions of the PATRIOT Act have ever been shown to have stopped an attack on this country.You will search in vain to find any reports by relevant agency or department Inspectors General or the Government Accountability Office, that show, based on a truly independent review of the available data (classified or otherwise), that any PATRIOT Act authority can be credited with stopping an attack on America. In fact, multiple examinations of such claims have found the opposite.Worse, a number of the bill’s provisions have been used to violate the constitutional rights of Americans, and to chill debate over the so-called War on Terror.There are documented reports of American Muslims curtailing or even ceasing charitable contributions to American-based Muslim charitable organizations in the wake of the passage of the PATRIOT Act in fear of being accused of providing financial support to a “terrorist” organization. That fear proved well-grounded when the “material support” provision of the PATRIOT Act was used to prosecute the Humanitarian Law Project for engaging in peace-making work between Kurdish rebels and the Turkish government.The American Library Association was so alarmed by the PATRIOT Act’s effects that at its 2005 meeting it issued a resolution condemning the law and its chilling effect on libraries and their patrons who worried that their book checkout and online browsing histories would be subject to disclosure to the FBI under Sec. 215 of the law. That provision was initially labeled “the library provision” of the PATRIOT Act precisely because the FBI sought those very type of records from a Connecticut library in 2005. The law’s sweeping language allowed the government to demand any “tangible things” from public or private entities involving American citizens as long as the “tangible things” sought were “relevant” to the collection of “foreign intelligence information” or terrorism.But it was former NSA contractor Edward Snowden’s amazing revelations in 2013 that helped highlight just how out-of-control government surveillance under Sec. 215 of the PATRIOT Act had become more than a decade after its passage and its two intervening congressional renewals. Snowden’s disclosure that Verizon was, under FISA Court order, providing bulk telephone metadata to federal law enforcement and intelligence entities provoked a rhetorical uproar in the press and on Capitol Hill.Yet even after nearly two years’ worth of news stories based on the trove of documents Snowden removed from NSA and supplied to various press outlets, the response of Congress to the clearly documented abuses of the Sec. 215 PATRIOT Act program was the rather anemic USA Freedom Act which actually left the discredited Sec. 215 program in place, marginally modified.Why does any of this matter? Because exactly the same scenario is playing out in the lead up to the looming expiration of another controversial surveillance authority—Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act (FAA).Earlier this month, Sensenbrenner—author of the original PATRIOT Act and the USA Freedom Act—joined a number of his GOP and Democratic House Judiciary Committee colleagues in introducing the deceptively named USA Liberty Act.In a joint statement accompanying the bill’s introduction, Sensenbrenner called the legislation “carefully crafted” and “the type of common sense compromise…It balances privacy and security concerns…” The truth is that the bill is a classic, inside-the-Beltway exercise in legislative legerdemain.A core principle behind the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment is that warrants should be issued on an individual basis at a probable cause standard. By definition, a mass surveillance program like Sec. 702 of the FAA is not individualized in its targeting—it is a digital vacuum cleaner, driven by NSA- or FBI-supplied “selectors,” or search terms, which can encompass dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of targets.And while those targets are supposed to be foreigners, as Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) has intimated, NSA may in fact be conducting “domestic to domestic” surveillance on targets here in America. The USA Liberty Act does nothing to address this allegation and potential threat—just as it does nothing to punish Justice Department and NSA officials for repeatedly lying to the FISA Court.Indeed, the list of things the USA Liberty Act sidesteps is too long to recount here-but as with most of the debate about post-9/11 surveillance programs, it’s not the details that matter, but the big-picture principles.And the big picture here is that history is quite literally repeating itself: Congress is on the verge of reauthorizing—in one form or another—a surveillance program that 1) has not demonstrably made the nation safer, 2) is clearly violating the Constitution in multiple ways, and 3) is serving as a very expensive jobs program for federal employees and contractors involved in its implementation.Bit by bit, these insidious programs are warping American political institutions destroying social bonds. The PATRIOT Act, the FAA, and their related surveillance programs are altering, perhaps irrevocably, the very nature of the relationship between the people and their government. We now live a country in which federal intelligence and law enforcement entities view the public at large, through the distorted, dark prism of mass surveillance programs, as suspects first, and citizens a very distant second.When the executive branch and Congress repeatedly conspire to pass laws taking away constitutional rights and the effects become measurable—rights lost, speech chilled, major corporate entities acting as surrogates/partners for government surveillance and repression—these developments herald the emergence of a proto-fascist state.Americans are regularly rhetorically terrorized by their government into believing, falsely, that an ISIS gunman lurks around every corner. Like a rattlesnake’s paralyzing venom, the government’s terrorism paranoia campaign, amplified by the media, has made the public politically catatonic about these constitutionally lethal mass surveillance programs. Whether they will awaken from that stupor in time to cure the disease brought on by the PATRIOT Act and its spawn remains to be seen.Happy PATRIOT Act Day!USA PATRIOT Act | Facts, History, & Controversy

Because 9/11 resulted in The Patriot ActWithout question, 9/11. And it had nothing to do with wars or loss of life. Without trivializing those who died and their loved ones, the biggest loss suffered as a result of 9/11 was our loss of liberty. Specifically, The Patriot Act. Hastily passed 45 days after 9/11 in the name of national security, The Patriot Act was the first of many changes to surveillance laws that made it easier for the government to spy on ordinary Americans by expanding the authority to monitor phone and email communications, collect bank and credit reporting records, and track the activity of innocent Americans on the Internet. While most Americans think it was created to catch terrorists, the Patriot Act actually turns regular citizens into suspects. Eighteen years ago, President George W. Bush signed into law the most sweeping, publicly acknowledged domestic surveillance authority in American history. Enacted six weeks after the 9/11 attacks and over the vehement objections and warnings of civil libertarians, the bill passed the Senate 98–1 and the House 357–66. In a press release issued the same day, the bill’s author, Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), said that“This legislation gives law enforcement greater tools to aggressively find those who have and would terrorize innocent Americans and freedom-loving people everywhere. The PATRIOT Act takes off the kid gloves with terrorists by removing unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles that have hindered law enforcement’s efforts against new and dangerous enemies lurking in the shadows. This is achieved without discarding our civil liberty protections that makes our country unique and great.” In reality, the bill had been rushed through Congress before any 9/11 inquiry had commenced, much less concluded. Congress had yet to investigate why the attacks had succeeded in the first place. Thus, the PATRIOT Act was a solution to a problem that remained unexamined at the time it became law. Within three years of its enactment, two separate national reports—one by Congress, the other by the 9/11 Commission—would conclude that it was not a lack of data, but a lack of focused intelligence analysis and dissemination that impeded the intelligence community from detecting the terrorist plot. The PATRIOT Act’s constitutionally compromised, data-centric approach was, and remains, the wrong solution for preventing future attacks. Indeed, in the nearly 20 years since it became law, it has become clear that none of the 160 provisions of the PATRIOT Act have ever been shown to have stopped an attack on this country. You will search in vain to find any reports by relevant agency or department Inspectors General or the Government Accountability Office, that show, based on a truly independent review of the available data (classified or otherwise), that any PATRIOT Act authority can be credited with stopping an attack on America. In fact, multiple examinations of such claims have found the opposite. Worse, a number of the bill’s provisions have been used to violate the constitutional rights of Americans, and to chill debate over the so-called War on Terror. There are documented reports of American Muslims curtailing or even ceasing charitable contributions to American-based Muslim charitable organizations in the wake of the passage of the PATRIOT Act in fear of being accused of providing financial support to a “terrorist” organization. That fear proved well-grounded when the “material support” provision of the PATRIOT Act was used to prosecute the Humanitarian Law Project for engaging in peace-making work between Kurdish rebels and the Turkish government.The American Library Association was so alarmed by the PATRIOT Act’s effects that at its 2005 meeting it issued a resolution condemning the law and its chilling effect on libraries and their patrons who worried that their book checkout and online browsing histories would be subject to disclosure to the FBI under Sec. 215 of the law. That provision was initially labeled “the library provision” of the PATRIOT Act precisely because the FBI sought those very type of records from a Connecticut library in 2005. The law’s sweeping language allowed the government to demand any “tangible things” from public or private entities involving American citizens as long as the “tangible things” sought were “relevant” to the collection of “foreign intelligence information” or terrorism.But it was former NSA contractor Edward Snowden’s amazing revelations in 2013 that helped highlight just how out-of-control government surveillance under Sec. 215 of the PATRIOT Act had become more than a decade after its passage and its two intervening congressional renewals. Snowden’s disclosure that Verizon was, under FISA Court order, providing bulk telephone metadata to federal law enforcement and intelligence entities provoked a rhetorical uproar in the press and on Capitol Hill. Yet even after nearly two years’ worth of news stories based on the trove of documents Snowden removed from NSA and supplied to various press outlets, the response of Congress to the clearly documented abuses of the Sec. 215 PATRIOT Act program was the rather anemic USA Freedom Act which actually left the discredited Sec. 215 program in place, marginally modified.Why does any of this matter? Because exactly the same scenario is playing out in the lead up to the looming expiration of another controversial surveillance authority—Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act (FAA). Sensenbrenner—author of the original PATRIOT Act and the USA Freedom Act—joined a number of his GOP and Democratic House Judiciary Committee colleagues in introducing the deceptively named USA Liberty In a joint statement accompanying the bill’s introduction, Sensenbrenner called the legislation “carefully crafted” and “the type of common sense compromise… It balances privacy and security concerns…” The truth is that the bill is a classic, inside-the-Beltway exercise in legislative legerdemain. A core principle behind the U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment is that warrants should be issued on an individual basis at a probable cause standard. By definition, a mass surveillance program like Sec. 702 of the FAA is not individualized in its targeting—it is a digital vacuum cleaner, driven by NSA- or FBI-supplied “selectors,” or search terms, which can encompass dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of targets.And while those targets are supposed to be foreigners, as Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) has intimated, NSA may in fact be conducting “domestic to domestic” surveillance on targets here in America. The USA Liberty Act does nothing to address this allegation and potential threat—just as it does nothing to punish Justice Department and NSA officials for repeatedly lying to the FISA Court. Indeed, the list of things the USA Liberty Act sidesteps is too long to recount here-but as with most of the debate about post-9/11 surveillance programs, it’s not the details that matter, but the big-picture principles. And the big picture here is that history is quite literally repeating itself: Congress is on the verge of reauthorizing—in one form or another—a surveillance program that 1) has not demonstrably made the nation safer, 2) is clearly violating the Constitution in multiple ways, and 3) is serving as a very expensive jobs program for federal employees and contractors involved in its implementation.Bit by bit, these insidious programs are warping American political institutions destroying social bonds. The PATRIOT Act, the FAA, and their related surveillance programs are altering, perhaps irrevocably, the very nature of the relationship between the people and their government. We now live a country in which federal intelligence and law enforcement entities view the public at large, through the distorted, dark prism of mass surveillance programs, as suspects first, and citizens a very distant second.When the executive branch and Congress repeatedly conspire to pass laws taking away constitutional rights and the effects become measurable—rights lost, speech chilled, major corporate entities acting as surrogates/partners for government surveillance and repression—these developments herald the emergence of a proto-fascist state. Americans are regularly rhetorically terrorized by their government into believing, falsely, that an ISIS gunman lurks around every corner. Like a rattlesnake’s paralyzing venom, the government’s terrorism paranoia campaign, amplified by the media, has made the public politically catatonic about these constitutionally lethal mass surveillance programs. Whether they will awaken from that stupor in time to cure the disease brought on by the PATRIOT Act and its spawn remains to be seen.Happy PATRIOT Act Day!USA PATRIOT Act | Facts, History, & Controversy1 view

This is where they have their Corporate Center:3160 NW 1st Avenue Pompano Beach, Florida 33169 Tel 786 235 9026 but they don’t answer their phone so you have to leave them a message.The Investor Contact is listed as:Patrick Greenish, presidentTel 786 235 [email protected] Statement Pursuant to the Pink Basic Disclosure GuidelinesLudwig Enterprises, Inc. A Nevada Corporation 1702 “A” Street #C-350 Sparks, Nevada 89431786-235-9026Ludwigent :: Home [email protected] 6162 End Third Quarter 2019 Report For the Period Ending:September 30, 2019 (the “Reporting Period”) [1]The Old History of its Financial Highlights[2]- The company was organized in 1988.- Became a public company in 2006- For the past 3 years has been fundedby an Angel Investor- Was issued a Patent in 2009 for itsrevolutionary Transmission Method- Has Authorized 75,000,000 CommonShares – Issued 74,420,999- The Float is 7,394,398 shares- Company has 554 shareholdersThe above data is not current, nor is it accurate so why doesn’t the SEC make sure that investors are protected by the current information and require the company to update its pubic web pages and data?From their old data:“Ludwig Enterprises, Inc.[3] is a revolutionary broadcasting company, offering programming that caters to a rapidly growing, multi-cultural market. They bridge the generations from hip youth culture forging new expressions of Americana to their grandparents who are the custodians of great worldwide traditions. These markets are largely excluded from today’s commercial broadcasters. Ludwig Enterprises is helping to move analogue radio into the digital age, harmonizing all ages and cultures as they add to America’s rich treasure of diversity.Ludwig Enterprises, Inc. is launching the first nationwide World radio network in the U.S. that really is for US! The One™ radio is bringing HD quality digital audio to a vast audience of diverse ages and origins, whose interests go unsatisfied by today’s domestic programming. The One™ radio is reaching out to a $1.5 trillion marketplace, and an audience which is almost completely ignored. The segment of listeners born abroad is over 30 million alone, which invites new for exciting programming and a new frontier for advertisers.Many listeners miss the classic the radio programs of the past, and just as radio played a vital role as a touchtone for American culture throughout the last century, so to The One™ radio is designed to be a centerpiece around which other cultures can unify and feel as much at home in the United States as they did in the countries they came from.It is estimated that 1 in 5 Americans are 55 and over. That means 70 million potential listeners are not able to enjoy the programming they love due to the homogenized formats that even satellite and internet radio offer. As listeners enter their golden years, radio plays an ever increasing role in ones window to the world and an important link to news and entertainment, especially if other areas of their lives become more limited. The One™ radio’s programming is designed to serve this, ever growing, abundant marketplace as well as providing youth culture with a vital link to its heritage.Ludwig Enterprises, Inc.[4] has developed a patented new radio that receives signals from the new Digital Television format (ATSC also known as HD-TV). The One™ radio offers 50 channels of diverse, HD quality, digital programming…Filipino, Pakistani, Hebrew, Chinese, Greek, Russian and many more, in addition to great English programming, old time radio shows, news 24 hours a day, audio books, educational and religious programming, as well as music ranging from Techno to Classical.The One™ radio receiver, developed by Ludwig Enterprises, Inc., is mobile, handheld and compatible with most docking stations, for your home, in the car or on the go.The One™ radio utilizes social networking capabilities to link advertisers and listeners via a unique technology that lets the advertiser know exact demographic / statistical data within 96 hours of playing a commercial in each of Ludwig’s 50 primarily markets, offering advertisers virtually real-time feedback for maximum market penetration. The privacy of the listener is protected as well because the regional data collected is not specific to the individual.INTELLECTUAL PROPERTYThe One™ radio’s unique patented technology utilizes a “carousel” that interleaves information streams in a repeating pattern for inclusion into a digital video broadcast (Digital TV: also known as HD TV), allowing Ludwig’s data carousel to deliver multiple dynamic digital audio programs, not just one.COMPETITIONThe nearest competitor to The One™ radio is Sirius/XM radio. There is very little overlap in our target audience since The One™ radio is reaching out to new markets that they do not serve, catering to expanding multicultural, 55 plus and emerging youth markets, with an emphasis on family unity.For legal reasons The One™ radio, like Sirius/XM, is considered a subscription based service. The similarities STOP there. Unlike Sirius/XM Ludwig does not charge a monthly fee. A small one-time subscription fee is charged upon activation and the unit itself is included free of charge. This is the benefit of utilizing existing terrestrial data transmission infrastructure rather than more costly satellite transmission, as well as Ludwig’s main source of revenue being derived from advertising and the sale of syndication time.”None of the above information is currently accurate, currently relevant or appropriate to the company.[5]The following information is from a press release which appears to have been syndicated on the financial news networks on December 19,2019:Ludwig Enterprises Inc., Acquires Direct Mortgage Investors Inc.[6]SPARKS, NV / ACCESSWIRE / December 19, 2019 / Ludwig Enterprises Inc., (OTC PINK:LUDG) Board of Directors is pleased to announce the positive consolidation efforts of Direct Mortgage Investors Inc. (Direct) and the Ludwig team. This is the first of several acquisitions that will allow the company to execute its business plan to roll-up mortgage companies and financial services companies related to the mortgage industry.Direct Mortgage Investors' management team has worked very hard to transition the daily tasks of the mortgage operation under LUDG. This transition has been deemed successful to date. Direct Mortgage Investors Inc[7]., is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Ludwig Enterprises Inc.Based in Chicago IL, Direct is a mortgage broker that was formed via multiple brokers and offices coming together in 2017. Direct is licensed in 14 states. The firm has approximately 80 loan officers in multiple offices in Illinois, Michigan and Florida. The principles of Direct, on average, have more than twenty years of experience in the mortgage business.During the 2018 fiscal year, Direct did $2.4 million in revenue and a little more than $100,000 in profit. For the first nine month of the 2019 year, Direct reported $3.99 million in revenue and $95,000 in net income. The acquisition of Direct is envisioned to be a positive transaction for the shareholders of Ludwig.Contact:Jean CherubinCEOLudwig Enterprises, Inc.[8][email protected]: Ludwig Enterprises Inc.But if you email or phone either contact listed in this answer, you get no response.Further Due Diligence from the most available SEC filings[9] doesn’t provide much more evidence of this company being anything but a shell company nor a fully going concern at the moment: Official site of OTCQX, OTCQB and Pink MarketsTHE COMPANY HAS TOO MANY NOTES TO ITS FILINGS WITH http://PINKSHEETS.COMLUDWIG ENTERPRISES, INC. CONSOLIDATED(A Development Stage Company)NOTES SEPTEMBER 30, 2019NOTE A – 1988 ‐Ludwig Enterprises was incorporated and issued 1,000 common shares at $1.00 per share.NOTE B – February 8, 2006 ‐ Ludwig Enterprises, Inc. a Nevada corporation was formed and capitalized at 75,000,000 authorized shares with 1,000 shares issued.NOTE C – March 28, 2006 ‐ Ludwig Enterprises, Inc. of Kentucky merged with its wholly owned Nevada subsidiary, the subsidiary survived and becoming the parent. The Kentucky corporation was dissolved.NOTE D ‐ March 28, 2006 ‐ Immediately following Ludwig Enterprise, Inc. of Kentucky’s merger into its Nevada subsidiary the company issued a 60,000 to 1 reverse split changing the issued shares from 1,000 common shares to 60,000,000 common shares.NOTE E – 1988 to February 25, 2007 ‐ the Company had 544 shareholders. February 25, 2007 five (5) additional shareholders were added to the shareholder list for a total of 549 total shareholders of record.NOTE F ‐ February 25, 2007 ‐ the company issued a total of 825,000 restricted shares to five individuals for services rendered.NOTE G – September 30, 2009 7,500,000 treasury shares were sold at $.01 per share.NOTE H ‐ May 1, 2009 MDI Corporate Actions at Nasdaq approved issuers request for a 100:1 reverse split. The split was effective this date. Issuer’s trading symbol was changed to LUDG with CUSIP number 54973P 20 3NOTE I – September 30, 2009 the company issued 7,500,000 restricted common shares from Treasury to retire a debt owing to Worthington Financial Services, Inc. in the amount of $75,000. Each share was exchanged at the rate of $0.01 per share.NOTE J ‐ September 30, 2009 September 30, 2009 the issuance of the shares below to retire debt triggered non‐dilution protection on 546,650 common shares. This action required the total issued share distribution to be increased to 74,421,000.NOTE K ‐ April 28, 2010 The Board of Directors of Issuer and New World Global, Inc. entered into a “debt for equity exchange” of $20,000.00 for 20,000,000 restricted common shares of Issuer. This action triggered Non dilution rights of Issuer’s largest shareholder, Worthington Financial, Inc. resulting in 77,636,612 additional shares being issued to Worthington. Additionally, other shareholders with Non‐Dilution rights received 99,196,785 shares. A total of 196,833,397 new common shares being issued.NOTE L ‐ June 21, 2011 Ludwig Enterprises, Inc. Board of Directors announces a Reverse Stock Split of one hundred to one (100:1) for is sole class of stock. The Board of Directors met (06/20/2011) and voted to recommend the action. A special shareholders meeting was held (06/20/2011) consisting of shareholders holding in excess of 50%+ of the company's stock, the action was voted on and approved with the effective date to be July 5th 2011 at 12:01 AM. The Reverse Split is proportional. No rights of any shareholder will be altered or diminished. All fractional shares resulting from the split will be rounded up to the nearest whole number. This action will result in a decrease of the issued number of shares from 271,254,396 to approximately 2,713,108 common shares.NOTE M ‐ July 5, 2011 Board of Directors voted unanimously to exchange $62,500.00 of debt for common shares at par value. This action triggered non‐dilution rights on 223,046,752 (pre split) shares due to lock‐up leak‐out agreements. July 6, 2011 was the effective date of reverse split.NOTE N – January 5, 2012 Issuer’s $73,500 Line of Credit was cancelled. Issuer was subsequently able to acquire up to $25,000 of short term funding from an alternate source to meet day‐to‐day expenses that tend to accelerate during the 1st Quarter of each year. It is Issuer’s position, as soon as possible, to convert the short‐term obligation into a long‐term instrument.NOTE 0 ‐ March 5, 2012 Board of Directors and a majority of the shareholders voted and affirmed a 350:1 reverse split. Future balance sheets will be adjusted to reflect a modification to the number of issued shares.NOTE P ‐ April 26, 2012 Debt for Equity Exchange $20,000 for 2,000,000 common shares. This action triggered certain non‐dilution rights.NOTE Q ‐June 29, 2012 Worthington Financial Services, Inc. and Issuer terminated their join Lock‐up/Leak‐ out agreement with non‐dilution protection.Note R ‐ June 29, 2012 Worthington Financial Services, Inc. exchanged $100,000 of debt owed to it for Ludwig common shares at par being equal to 100,000,000 common shares.Note S – May 2, 2014 Patron Corp. acquired Issuer’s Notes Payable from Worthington Financial, Inc.Note T – May 2, 2014 Patron Corp. purchased the portion of issuer held patent(s) / intellectual properties not owned by others for the sum of $150,000. This amount being the book value of patents at $14,785 plus $135,215 in excess of book. This amount being retired from debt held by Patron Corp. on the balance sheet of Issuer.Note U‐ December 16, 2016 the Board of Directors cancelled and rescinded a June 29, 2012 board resolution to reserve 35,000,000 common shares and or options for said shares. No shares or options had been issued.Note V ‐ Updates 2019:March 22, 2019 The company announced its hire of Cortil Duane Roberts as its new vice president in charge of acquisitions.April 2, 2019 The company executed a purchase agreement for Direct Mortgage Investors, Inc. Issuer executed a purchase agreement for Direct Mortgage Investors, Inc. subject to closing.May 31, 2019 Board of Directors Meeting approved a 2019 Equity Incentive Plan to distribute to current and future employees, officers, directors up to 12,000,000 common shares of the company. Shares authorization rights will be held in an Incentive Plan Trust to be disbursed by the company’s CEO in such amount and time as he directs. The company further authorized issuance of 32,200,000 shares to be used for acquisitions.May 1, 2019 The company and Direct Mortgage Investors, Inc. executed an extension for closing.May 31, 2019 Board of Directors Meeting approved a 2019 Equity Incentive Plan to distribute to current and future employees, officers, directors up to 40,000,000 common shares of the company. The shares will be issued and held in an Incentive Plan Trust to be disbursed by the company’s CEO in such amount and time as he directs. The company further authorized issuance of 30,000,000 shares to be used for acquisitions.June 12, 2019 Board of Directors approved an amendment to the acquisition agreement of Direct Mortgage Investors, Inc. June 20, 2019 Issuer acquired Direct Mortgage Investors, Inc.June 23, 2019 Issuer acquired Direct Mortgage Investors, Inc. as a 100% owned subsidiary for 32 million common shares of issuer.On or about September 9, 2019 Issuer entered into five short term convertible notes for a total of $55,000 due February 9, 2020 at an interest rate of 15% per annum.The notes are convertible into 100,000 common shares for each $1,000 of principle.Basis of Accounting The Corporation’s policy is to prepare its financial statements on the accrual basis of accounting in accordance with principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Financial StatementsThe financial statements and notes are representations of the Corporation’s management who is responsible for their integrity and objectivity. The accounting policies conform to the basis of accounting defined above and have been consistently applied in the preparation of the financial statements.Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates.Property and Equipment The Company owns no real property or equipment.Personal property items (equipment and furniture) acquired by the Company are or will be recorded at cost. The property will be depreciated over its estimated useful life using the straight‐line method with and estimated zero salvage value.Intangible Assets The company holds certain license rights for the use of technology formerly held by Compress Technologies, Inc.’s (CTI) technologies those rights have been transferred to Thomas E. Terwilliger. Ludwig paid no cash for these rights. Ludwig and CTI exchanged a right to use of CTI’s technology for a Ludwig technology currently being developed.OTC Markets Group Inc. OTC Pink Basic Disclosure Guidelines (v2.0 February 2019) Page 22 of 22 NOTE K – Current Liabilities Contingent and Conditional Current liabilities include the following: Issuer has in the 3rd Quarter of 2019 entered into $55,000 of short term convertible notes.Line of Credit The company entered into an agreement for a Cash Access Account in the amount of $25,000. $20,357.95 of the Credit Line was expended during the 1st Quarter 2012. $4,642.05 remains available for operations. The line of credit is collateralized by future revenues of the. The interest rate is 15% annualized on funds withdrawn from the credit line. $20,000 of the $25,000 of borrowed funds has been converted to common stock in a debt for equity exchange.Sufficient Cash for Operations Issuer has $204,427 of cash or cash equivalents available. Based upon the current rate of consumption issuer could be able to operate at its current size for the next fiscal year without need for additional funding. Additional funds may be sought for future acquisitions.Patents May 2, 2014 Patron Corp. purchased the portion of issuer held patent(s) / intellectual properties not owned by others for the sum of $150,000. This amount being the book value of patents at $14,785 plus $135,215 in excess of book. This amount being retired from debt held by Patron Corp. on the balance sheet of Issuer. April 25, 2012 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office awarded Ludwig Enterprises patent # 8,166,190 Method and system for multiple data channel transfer using a single data stream. See Note T above. July 15, 2009 filings were sent to the US Patent and Trademark Office as required. The company filed US Provisional Application Serial Number 61/134/920 on July 15, 2008 regarding its proprietary technology.END OF NOTESTransfer Agent Name: Standard Registrar & Transfer Company, Inc. Phone: 801-571-8844 Email: [email protected]“As of January 1, 2019 the number of shares outstanding of our Common Stock was: 303,191,762 As of September 30, 2019, the number of shares outstanding of our Common Stock was: 335,391,762” [10]2006 Year Established Loans Funded $400m 70+ Loan OfficersLicensed in 12 States[11]View source version on Industry-Leading Flat-fee Press Release Service:Ludwig Enterprises Inc., Acquires Direct Mortgage Investors Inc.Latest Report09/30/2019 Quarterly ReportFiscal Year End12/31COMPANY OFFICERS & CONTACTSJean CherubinPresident, CEOThomas TerwilligerExecutive AssistantCOMPANY DIRECTORSJean CherubinChairman, President, CEOSERVICE PROVIDERSAccounting/Auditing FirmRonald La Duke, CPA3160 NW 1 AvenueSuite 3 Pompano Beach, FL 33064Securities Counsel Yates Law Firm8704 Zachary Circle Suite 3Louisville, KY 40214502-797-6861CONTACT THEM [email protected] [email protected] www.mtg101.comOak Lawn, IL Plantation, FL United StatesPhone:1-855-456-9782Phone: 954-919-1210Fax-Ph: +1 (800) 437-1490Securities Counsel Name: Frank Yates, Esq. Firm: Yates Law Firm Address 1: 202 Pheasant Ave., Ste 101 Address 2: Fairdale, Ky., 40118 Phone: 502-797-6861 Email: [email protected] or Auditor Name: Jean Cherubin Firm: Jean Cherubin Address 1: 3160 NW 1 Avenue Address 2: Pompano Beach, Florida Phone: 954-317-3355 Email: [email protected] Relations Consultant Pending News!Full Disclosures: Alex S. Gabor[12] at the time of this writing owns no shares directly or indirectly in this company mentioned in this answer.Footnotes[1] https://backend.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/235378/content[2] Ludwigent :: Home[3] Direct Mortgage Investors, Inc.[4] Direct Mortgage Investors Inc.[5] Ludwig Enterprises Inc. LUDG Board[6] Ludwig Enterprises Inc., Acquires Direct Mortgage Investors Inc.[7] Direct Mortgage Investors, Inc.[8] Direct Mortgage Investors Inc.[9] https://backend.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/235378/content[10] https://backend.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/235378/content[11] HOME | Dmidmi[12] Alex S. Gabor