Majority members (each holding a 1/3 interest) and co-founders of Hyegate, LLC, a New York LLC that owns Aragats Perlite OJSC (AP), an Armenian mining company, through subsidiary DAP LLC. Saro and Nareg provided all capital investment — approximately $3.3 million — for the venture. Represented by Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi PC.
A 1/3 member of Hyegate, LLC. A long-time attorney and associate of Saro and Nareg, formerly serving as general counsel to their business Harco Industries. Contributed zero capital to the venture; his role was to provide legal counsel and manage mining/legal operations in Armenia. Represented by Fox Rothschild LLP.
According to the Verified Complaint filed December 9, 2025, in 2017 Krikorian persuaded Saro Hartounian to invest in Aragats Perlite OJSC (AP), an Armenian perlite mining company. Saro and his son Nareg provided all of the investment capital — initially $825,000, growing over time to approximately $3.3 million. Krikorian contributed no capital; his role was to provide legal expertise and manage the legal and operational affairs of AP in Armenia through Hyegate and its subsidiary DAP LLC.
In fall 2025, Saro declined to invest further capital. Plaintiffs allege that Krikorian then attempted to seize full control of Hyegate and AP for himself on unfair terms, demanded assent within one day, and when refused, launched a campaign of conduct that the Plaintiffs allege caused serious harm to the business and to them personally.
On March 5, 2026, the Court entered a signed Preliminary Injunction Order — including a contested Paragraph D governing the arbitral tribunal's authority — after rejecting Defendant's proposed language. The Judge's handwritten annotation on the signed order states: "This Court finds the above language is consistent with this Court's stated order on the record and reflective of what this Court has indeed ordered."
→ View the signed Order Granting Preliminary Injunction (PDF) (Docket: BER-C-000287-25 | Trans ID: CHC202674129 | March 5, 2026)
The following are allegations contained in the Verified Complaint and court filings. They have not been finally adjudicated.
| Count | Claim | Summary of Allegations |
|---|---|---|
| I | Breach of Fiduciary Duty | Krikorian allegedly violated his duties as a Manager and Member of Hyegate by acting unilaterally against the company's interests and those of the majority members. |
| II | Breach of Contract | Alleged breaches of the Amended and Restated LLC Operating Agreement of Hyegate, including acting without majority authorization. |
| III | Defamation | Plaintiffs allege Krikorian circulated false statements within the Armenian community — including that Saro was financially desperate and that Nareg was involved in "illegal" and "criminal" matters — which were untrue and damaging. |
| IV | Business Defamation (Hyegate) | Alleged false statements to AP's primary customer and distributor, including accusing AP of contract violations, which invited potential litigation against the company. |
| V | Fraud / Conspiracy to Commit Fraud | Alleged fraudulent misrepresentations made to Saro in connection with Krikorian's role in the venture and his attempted takeover of Hyegate. |
| VI | Declaratory Judgment | Plaintiffs seek a declaration of the parties' rights and obligations under the Operating Agreement and governing documents. |
| VII | Dissociation | Plaintiffs seek Krikorian's dissociation from Hyegate, LLC based on his alleged conduct. |
Plaintiffs allege that on or about November 17, 2025, Krikorian filed a complaint with Armenian government authorities claiming AP was out of compliance with Armenian labor laws — matters that allegedly fell within the scope of his own duties as legal manager of AP.
Plaintiffs allege that on November 28, 2025, Krikorian sent sensitive, confidential business information of AP directly to the company's primary customer — in alleged violation of his fiduciary duties and the Operating Agreement.
Plaintiffs allege Krikorian threatened AP with bankruptcy and invited Armenian government inspectors to investigate the company for "illegal" activity when Saro refused his buyout demands.
Plaintiffs allege Krikorian spread false rumors in the close-knit Armenian community that Saro was offering his shares because of financial desperation, and that Nareg was involved in criminality.
Plaintiffs allege Krikorian refused to attend a November 20, 2025 Special Meeting of Hyegate's Managers, at which Resolutions were passed affirming he had no authority to act unilaterally — and then ignored those Resolutions.
Plaintiffs allege Krikorian presented Saro with terms demanding immediate transfer of all of Saro and Nareg's interest in Hyegate to Krikorian, giving him one day to decide, despite contributing no capital to the venture.
Judge Ostuni granted a Preliminary Injunction enjoining Defendant Van Z. Krikorian from:
All 23 public filings in Hartounian et al. v. Van Z. Krikorian, Docket No. BER-C-000287-25, listed in chronological order. Click any document to open the PDF.
All documents are public filings accessible through the New Jersey eCourts portal. Docket: BER-C-000287-25. | Presiding: Hon. Nicholas Ostuni, Sr., J.S.C.
As of March 28, 2026: