Justice for Diva - Part 16 - "The art of CYA"

I have a checklist of things to do for Justice For Diva. One thing that wasn't on the top was to contact Paw Print Genetics and ask them how it's possible for someone other than the dog's legal owner can submit a DNA sample and THEY (Paw Print Genetics) will run a DNA profile on your dog without your authorization.... Well, today I did just that. I asked some simple to comprehend questions. The response from Paw Print Genetics was... let's just say "ass covering...."

Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 11:06 AM
To: Paw Print Genetics
Subject: Sherwood's Super Heroine - DIVA

Paw Print Genetics
Attn: Lisa G. Shaffer PhD
220 E Rowan Ave Suite 220
Spokane, WA 99207

Reference: SHERWOOD'S Super Heroine - "Diva"
American Kennel Club registration number: SR84728701
Microchip Number: 7E10114570
Owners: Debra Hanson, Craig Oyster

Dear Ms. Shaffer,

I was in contact with you during the month of May 2017 when a Canadian Veterinarian by the name of Ann Greenbank submitted DNA on my dog Diva.

You were aware at the time I filed a civil suit against a Nickie Hertzog who was claiming ownership of Diva and another dog named Twister - both Golden Retrievers.

Casey Carl DVM, and employee of your company contacted me and informed me Greenbank had submitted DNA on Diva and wanted my permisssion to run DNA testing and to pay for the costs.

AS you reccall, both you and Casey Carl DVM refused to provide me with the microchip number of the dog whose sample was submitted for testing.

I stated in writing that I specifically denied permission to run any DNA testing on Diva.

I now bring your attention to the attached judgment awarded to me in the civil suit filed against Nickie Hertzog.

Hertzog was found guilty of conversion of Diva, and Trespass to Chattel and disparagement of title on Twister.

The jury awarded me damages.

During the discovery process in the civil suit I was made aware of a letter that Ann Greenbank submitted to your company, Paw Print Genetics, requesting a DNA match on Diva.

I have attached the letter Greenbank submitted directly to you.

Also during the discovery process, I was made aware that Paw Print Genetics did in fact run a DNA test, a profile on my dog Diva.

I have attached the Paw Print Genetics DNA profiling certificate.

This test was run without my permission.

The Paw Print DNA Profiling certificate that I obtained through the courts lists the call name as DIVA, but omitts the proper registered name, specially my kennel name SHERWOOD. In addition, the AKC registration number and microchip number do match my Diva.

It is my understanding that Ann Greenbank, a licensed veterinarian with credentials to practice in Canada came to Hertzog's property on May 20, 2017 to attend a dog show. While attending, Greenbank just happened to have the proper blood collection tube and syringe to perform a blood draw out of her licensed area and somehow properly stored the blood on a Saturday and shipped it per your website's instructions for processing.

My questions to you are as follows:

1. Who gave Paw Print Genetics permission to run specifically the DNA profile tests which produced the attached Paw Print DNA Profiling certificate?

2. Who paid for this test?

3. Who has ownership of this certificate?

4. Am I correct in assuming there are now TWO DNA samples for the same dog stored at Paw Print Genetics, using the same AKC number now registered to two different owners?

5. Am I correct in assuming that anyone can perform a blood draw, or submit cheek swabs on dogs they do not own, and Paw Print Genetics will perform DNA testing without owner approval?

6. Please explain how my 2015 DNA submittion on the same dog to Paw Print Genetics wasn't protected by the privacy laws posted on the Paw Print Genetics wesbite.  

I am sure omitting Sherwood from this dog's registration number on the Paw Print DNA Profiling certificate was a computer error, but since Diva was bred by me, and have always been owned my me even through Hertzog's fraudulent claims, I am requesting an unedited certificate showing the dog's proper registered name be corrected and a correction of ownership. I anticipate this test will now appear on my ownership records with Paw Print Genetics.

The Paw Print Genetics DNA profiling certificate I have does not show the necessary genetypes/allele necessary to match your DNA profile to the American Kennel Club DNA profile I have for Sherwood's Super Heroine. Your certificate shows bluish boxes and no markers for comparison. Please forward the necessary genetypes/allele on the sample taken May 20, 2017 that produced the certificate dated October 11, 2017.


Debra Hanson


From: Lisa Shaffer
Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎February‎ ‎21‎, ‎2018 ‎1‎:‎09‎ ‎PM
To: sherwoodgr@gmail.com
Dear Debra,
We never used the DNA sample from Debra Oyster’s account PPG ID# 9761 identified as Diva for any DNA profiling test.
Please note that this dog’s sample is listed under Debra Oyster at email address edu@csianimalabuse.org
Unless you go into your Paw Print Genetics account and update your name and email address, I cannot have further conversations with you as I cannot identify that this is indeed Debra Oyster.
Lisa G Shaffer, PhD, FACMG
Founder & CEO, Paw Print

From: "sherwoodgr@gmail.com"
Date: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 at 12:23 PM
To: Lisa Shaffer
Subject: Re: Sherwood's Super Heroine - DIVA
Dear Lisa,
The account has been updated so I will assume the issues presented in my email below will now be addressed.
Debra Hanson

From: Lisa Shaffer
Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎February‎ ‎21‎, ‎2018 ‎1‎:‎33‎ ‎PM
To: sherwoodgr@gmail.com
Hi Debra,
The certificate that you have in your possession clearly has PPG ID # 66297. That is the ID # of the sample sent to us from Ann Greenbank for Nickie Hertzog.
We did not use your sample, PPG ID# 9761. You never gave us permission to use it and we never received a court order to proceed with comparison, so it was never done.
Because Nickie paid for a DNA profile test, we completed that DNA profile but it was not compared to anything else. How the court determined that the sample sent to us by Ann Greenbank is indeed your dog Diva did not involve us or your DNA.
I don’t think I need to answer the rest of your questions given that we did not use your sample.

From: sherwoodgr@gmail.com>
Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎February‎ ‎21‎, ‎2018 ‎1‎:‎35‎ ‎PM>
To: Lisa Shaffer
Hi Lisa,
I didn’t expect you to answer my questions. Perhaps you will address the same questions when my attorney presents them to you.
My intention is to file a lawsuit against your company so I suggest preserving both DNA samples on the same dog.

From: Lisa Shaffer
Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎February‎ ‎21‎, ‎2018 ‎2‎:‎00‎ ‎PM
To: sherwoodgr@gmail.com
Threatening me with a lawsuit is not going to get me to say anything different to you because I am telling you the truth.
I am sorry that you are so angry about this that you can’t see that we didn’t use your sample - the sample that YOU sent to us.
if someone else sends us a sample and pays for the test, we are obligated to perform the testing and give them results. That DNA profile is for the sample sent to us by Ann Greenbank. I have absolutely NO IDEA if it matches the sample that you sent to us. I have absolutely NO IDEA if it even belongs to a Golden Retriever. We did not use your sample.
You can continue to be angry or you can choose to move on.
I don’t know what else I can do for you. If you want YOUR SAMPLE compared to the one that Nickie sent to us, we would need Nickie’s permission or a court order. That is the only way for you to know if both samples are from the same dog and WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT COMPARISON. You don’t have to sue me to get me to use your sample. Just place an order for a DNA profile. If you want those two DNA profiles compared, I would need Nickie’s permission or a court order.
In addition, I have NO IDEA if your original sample is still intact, not degraded or even has enough volume left to do any additional testing. In general, samples that old do not perform well on our DNA profiling test. So no guarantee of any results from a sample that old.

From: sherwoodgr@gmail.com
Sent: ‎Wednesday‎, ‎February‎ ‎21‎, ‎2018 ‎2‎:‎14‎ ‎PM
To: Lisa Shaffer
I can surmise from the bold, underlining attacking tone of your response to my email you have chosen not to address my concerns.
Your company performed a DNA profile test on a dog which is not legally owned by the person who submitted the DNA or legally owned by the person who paid for the testing.
Neither Greenbank or Hertzog have legal ownership.
You are intelligent enough to read my email, process the questions, and format a reasonable response.
There is no need for a personal attack.
Nowhere in my email do I claim your company used my original sample.
As stated, your company performed a DNA profile test on my dog using newly obtained DNA (May 2017) as described in my email and produced the DNA profile dated October 2017.
A lawsuit is not a threat but simply a legal remedy to obtain answers to simple questions one such as yourself is not willing to address.
I have updated my Paw Print Genetics profile to include my attorney as an additional contract which should satisfy your privacy protocols for further conversation.
Have a nice day,
Debi Hanson

I attached an actual copy of the email showing the TONE in the response.
Apparently pushed a button here.

(Click document(s)/images for full view)

PawPrint Genetics Email

            Home   |   History   |   The Boys   |   The Girls   |  Puppy Info   |   Dog Training   |   Contact