Exhibit P (BC403442)

1 October, 2007

Terrence A. Oved
OVED & OVED LLP
101 Avenue of the Americas
15th Floor
New York, NY 10013


Re: SOLA et al

Dear Mr. Oved:

Thank you for your letter of August 22, 2007 concerning the matter referenced above. I hereby inform you that Catherine Michiels Fine Custom Jewelry Inc
categorically denies the assertions made in the letter on behalf of your client(s), which misstate the facts of our involvement and are designed, no doubt, to have a coercive effect on me.

Furthermore, CMFJ Inc. disputes the balance you claim is owed. First, despite due demand, no samples were ever returned to me. Samples worth four thousand eighty dollars should be credited to any alleged balance.

SOLA et al have been aware of, and acquiesced to--as evidenced by their continued practice of accepting and depositing my checks--the arrangement by which commissions were paid to them. Even subsequent to my termination of the agreement, SOLA et al sought to continue the relationship with me, further evidencing acquiescence to the existing arrangement.

As you might know, and your client(s) will confirm, I did not have legal representation in negotiating the agreement between SOLA et al and me.

I believe the impetus behind the assertions made in your letter to me is to offset a claim I might make against SOLA et al for the destruction of brand properties my line enjoyed before engaging with them. Through their actions, SOLA et al conducted themselves in such a way as to distribute my line of jewelry in low-end clothing outlets without regard for the degrading effect on the positioning of my brand.

Through their actions, SOLA et al created a perception of my brand as an accessory label when it had been brought to them as a fine jewelry line distributed in outlets such as Barneys, Maxfield, L’Eclaireur and other high-end retailers. None of the sales outlets contracted by SOLA et al approached the standing of those already selling my brand when the agreement was entered into. In spite of my objections to this, SOLA et al continued to exhibit my line in trade shows catering to low-end clothing retailers, thus causing confusion amongst my hi-end clients.

Since terminating the relationship with SOLA et al, I have disassociated with forty percent of the retailers engaged by SOLA et al on the grounds that they did not provide appropriate positioning for the brand. The damage caused to my brand by the actions of SOLA et al is undeniable and will be recognizable to anyone with knowledge of brand management strategies and brand valuation. It only remains to make a calculation as to the extent of the injury.

Be advised that, without prejudice to any of the above and whilst reserving all possible claims against SOLA et al, I will make commission payments of five hundred dollars per month to SOLA. This is offered in settlement, not as any admission that the money is owed or that CMFJ Inc.has not been damaged.


Best regards,

Catherine Michiels