FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 

EMPYREAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ITZIK ILUZ,

Defendant.

 / 

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF

Plaintiff, Empyrean Medical Systems, Inc., by and through its undersigned 

counsel, hereby sues Defendant, Itzik Iluz, for damages and declaratory relief, and 

alleges as follows:

Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue

1. Plaintiff, Empyrean Medical Systems, Inc. (“Empyrean”), is a Delaware 

corporation that has its principal place of business in Palm Beach County, Florida.

2. Defendant, Itzik Iluz (“Iluz”), is an individual who is a citizen of Israel.

3. Iluz is subject to jurisdiction in Florida because, among other things, he 

performed the following acts:

a. Operated, conducted, engaged in, or carried on a business or business 

venture in Florida or has an office or agency in Florida, including, without 

limitation Sensus Healthcare, Inc.; 

Case 9:22-cv-81561-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2022 Page 1 of 8
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

2 

b. Committed a tortious act within Florida by, among other things, tortiously 

interfering with Empyrean’s advantageous business relationships as set 

forth in greater detail below; and 

c. Engaged in substantial and not isolated activity within Florida. 

4. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a)(2), 

because this is a civil action between Empyrean, which is a citizen of a state (Delaware 

and Florida), and Iluz, who is a citizen of a foreign state (Israel), and the amount in 

controversy exceeds $75,000. 

5. Venue is proper in the Southern District of Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§1391(b), as: (1) the judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or 

omissions giving rise to the claims occurred; or, in the alternative, (2) a judicial district 

in which Iluz is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction.

Facts Common to All Counts

6. Iluz and non-party Kal Fishman (“Fishman”) were both previously 

employed by Sensus Healthcare, Inc. (“Sensus”), a Florida company that has its 

principal place of business in Boca Raton, FL. 

7. After attending the 2018 American Society for Radiation Oncology Annual 

Meeting in San Antonio, TX (“ASTRO”), and while he was still working at Sensus, Iluz 

sat near Dr. Tatiana Rabin, who had also attended ASTRO, on a flight from the United 

States to Israel. 

8. During that flight, Dr. Rabin mentioned to Iluz, in casual conversation, an 

invention on which her husband, Dr. Dror Alezra, was working.

Case 9:22-cv-81561-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2022 Page 2 of 8
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

3 

9. During that flight and conversation, Dr. Rabin stated that Dr. Alezra was 

seeking assistance with raising capital to fund the implementation of his invention.

10. Iluz suggested to Dr. Rabin that she and Dr. Alezra should reach out to his 

colleague, Fishman in Boca Raton, FL, for assistance. 

11. Iluz subsequently informed Fishman, who was in the United States, about

the conversation he had with Dr. Rabin, and asked if Fishman would be interested in 

attending a meeting with Dr. Rabin and Dr. Alezra during Fishman’s next visit to Israel.

12. In April 2019, Fishman did, in fact, attend a dinner meeting with Dr. 

Rabin, Dr. Alezra, and Iluz. 

13. During their April 2019 dinner meeting, months before Empyrean had 

even been formed, Dr. Alezra, Dr. Rabin, and Fishman discussed Dr. Alezra’s invention. 

14. While Iluz attended that dinner meeting, he had no prior knowledge of 

the details or nature of Dr. Alezra’s invention and did not even know what the 

invention was. Thereafter, Iluz had no other involvement and no further participation 

in the discussions between Fishman and Dr. Alezra. 

15. Over the next several years, Fishman dedicated a significant amount of his 

time and efforts, as well as substantial amounts of private resources, to the planning 

and development of the technology and business model related to Dr. Alezra’s 

invention, including, without limitation, working with The University of Texas MD 

Anderson Cancer Center, as well as addressing initial capital funding needs. 

Case 9:22-cv-81561-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2022 Page 3 of 8
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

4 

16. On January 2, 2020, Fishman incorporated Empyrean as the entity to be 

used, among other things, to continue development and implementation of Dr. Alezra’s 

invention.

17. Iluz did not participate in Fishman’s efforts to develop Dr. Alezra’s 

invention, did not provide any input or resources to advance those efforts, did not assist 

or participate in the creation of Empyrean, and did not provide any meaningful 

assistance in raising capital. 

18. Notwithstanding his lack of involvement or participation, beginning in 

2020, after Empyrean had already been formed, Iluz started making unfounded and 

baseless demands for a substantial ownership interest in and compensation from 

Empyrean.

19. Iluz has also falsely claimed that there was an agreement that provided 

that he would be a co-founder or partner of Empyrean. No such agreement was ever 

reached.

20. Specifically, while Fishman initially considered hiring Iluz as an employee

if a company was formed and was operating with a sales staff, he never agreed to and 

steadfastly rejected any suggestion that Iluz was a co-founder of Empyrean or would be 

a partner thereof. Moreover, Empyrean was ultimately precluded from even 

considering employing Iluz after Empyrean learned about Iluz’s actions, including his 

actions as an employee of Sensus.

21. Notwithstanding the foregoing, now that Empyrean has completed its 

initial capital raise and it has become apparent that the project will be a major gameCase 9:22-cv-81561-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2022 Page 4 of 8
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

5 

changing breakthrough in cancer treatment, in an apparent effort to attempt to gain 

leverage, Iluz has now threatened to notify Empyrean’s present and potential investors 

of and otherwise publicize his baseless claims to an ownership interest in and 

purported right to compensation from Empyrean.

22. Iluz has actual knowledge that his claims and threats are causing and will 

continue to cause serious harm to Empyrean, its efforts to continue development of the 

technology related to Dr. Alezra’s invention, its contractual and business relationships, 

and its ability to raise additional needed capital.

23. Iluz’s claims to an ownership interest in or right to compensation from 

Empyrean lack any factual basis or legal merit and his threats to publicize those claims 

are designed solely for purposes of harassment and to “shake-down” Empyrean.

24. All conditions precedent to this action have occurred, have been satisfied, 

or have been waived.

25. Empyrean has retained undersigned counsel and is obligated to pay a 

reasonable fee for its services herein.

COUNT I – DECLARATORY JUDGMENT

26. Empyrean realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 25 

above as if set forth more fully herein.

27. There is a bona fide dispute between Empyrean and Iluz as to the validity 

of Iluz’s claims to entitlement to an ownership interest in and/or compensation from 

Empyrean.

Case 9:22-cv-81561-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2022 Page 5 of 8
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

6 

28. Empyrean has a justiciable question as to the existence or non-existence of 

a right, status, immunity, power or privilege, or as to some fact upon which the 

existence of such right, status, immunity, power or privilege does or may depend.

29. Empyrean is in doubt as to the right, status, immunity, power or privilege 

upon which Iluz’s claims are based.

30. There is a bona fide, actual, present need for a declaration as to the 

validity of Iluz’s claims to entitlement to an ownership interest in and/or compensation 

from Empyrean.

31. Accordingly, Empyrean is entitled to a declaratory judgment concerning 

the validity of Iluz’s claims to entitlement to an ownership interest in and/or 

compensation from Empyrean, as well as any further necessary or proper relief against 

any party whose rights have been determined by such declaratory judgment.

32. Pursuant to Rule 58, Fed. R. Civ. P., Plaintiff requests that the Court order 

a speedy hearing.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Empyrean Medical Systems, Inc., demands entry of a 

judgment in its favor and against Defendant, Itzik Iluz, for declaratory relief concerning 

the parties’ rights and obligations with respect to Itzik Iluz’s claims to entitlement to an

ownership interest in and/or compensation from Empyrean Medical Systems, Inc., 

additional supplemental relief, an award of costs, and such other and further relief as 

this Court deems just and proper.

Case 9:22-cv-81561-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2022 Page 6 of 8
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

7 

COUNT II – TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH 

ADVANTAGEOUS BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP

33. Empyrean realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 25 

above as if set forth more fully herein.

34. Empyrean has an advantageous business relationship with various 

investors who intend to provide capital to Empyrean, all of whom are located in the 

United States. 

35. Iluz has knowledge of Empyrean’s advantageous business relationship 

with its investors.

36. Iluz intentionally and without justification threatened to publicize his 

false and unsupported claims of entitlement to an ownership interest in and 

compensation from Empyrean for the purpose of interfering with Empyrean’s 

advantageous business relationships with its investors. 

37. Iluz does not have a legitimate business reason for making the foregoing 

threats.

38. Empyrean has and/or will suffer damages as a result of Iluz’s interference 

with its advantageous business relationships.

Case 9:22-cv-81561-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2022 Page 7 of 8
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

8 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Empyrean Medical Systems, Inc., demands entry of a 

judgment in its favor and against Defendant, Itzik Iluz, for damages, an award of costs, 

and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

DATED this 11th day of October, 2022. 

FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP

777 S. Flagler Drive 

Suite 1700 – West Tower

West Palm Beach, FL 33401 

Tel: (561) 835-9600 

By: /s/ Amy S. Rubin

Amy S. Rubin

Fla. Bar No. 476048 

arubin@foxrothschild.com

wpbeservice@foxrothschild.com

David A. Greene

Fla. Bar No. 87629 

dgreene@foxrothschild.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff, Empyrean Medical Systems, Inc.

Case 9:22-cv-81561-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2022 Page 8 of 8