Guava LLC, Arte de Oaxaca, LW Holdings and other Prenda’s bogus corporations

Guava LLC is not registered in any state, it is simply a facade for Lighspeed Media. Arte de Oaxaca is the same. It is shame that courts allow such BS complaints by bogus plaintiffs to be filed.

Guava LLC v. Skylar Case (Cook county IL)

Case No: 12-L-7363
Attorney for Plaintiff: Paul Duffy
Attorney for Defendant: Adam Urbanzcyk
Judge: Sanjay Taylor
Cook County court docket


By Raul

Allow me to preface this overview with a personal disclaimer: I do not like writing about anything of which the facts cannot be verified. So little is presently known about this lawsuit, that much of the following is pure speculation which may prove to be false.

Rotten Guava

The plaintiff in this lawsuit is a mystery; it seems as if the plaintiff’s attorney is being purposely vague in this regard. If you Google “Guava, LLC” you will discover a handful of USA corporations, none of which appear to be this plaintiff. Likewise a Google search reveals no password protected websites. Accordingly I am guessing that Guava, LLC is a an offshore corporation which is the assignee of the rights to certain pornographic works of Prenda Law’s current client base of pornographic content producers/distributors. Plaintiff’s attorney, Paul A. Duffy, is the “founding partner” of Prenda Law, Inc., f/k/a Steele Hansmeier, LLC. If you are not familiar with either law firm please search this blog and as well as the internet to get up to date, I promise it will be an eye opening experience.

Basically this is a computer hacking lawsuit in which the plaintiff claims Skyler Case and unnamed “co-conspirators” hacked into its systems and wrongfully obtained its “valuable information”. I am guessing that Prenda’s clients have pornographic pay sites which are password protected which were allegedly hacked into with compromised passwords. The complaint alleges four causes of action: violation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), trespass to chattels, breach of contract and civil conspiracy. Rather than get into the lack of legal merit of these claims you should know that Prenda has previously filed lawsuits on behalf of Lightspeed Media Corp., which have been analyzed at length on this blog. In particular you should read SJD’s post regarding a motion to dismiss filed by Jason Booth, Esq., which exposes the weakness of similar claims in this lawsuit. Laura Long, Esq., has filed a similar motion after getting the state lawsuit removed to federal court (ILSD).

Prenda was able to get discovery of thousands upon thousands of the personal identifying information of the “co-conspirators” by reason of an Agreed Order, dated 7/30/2012 between Duffy and Skyler Case’s attorney, Adam Urbanczyk (signed on 7/11/2012 — less than two weeks after the complaint). We do not know what, if any, consideration the named defendant received in exchange for this agreement but Duffy received discovery and the foreclosure that this lawsuit will be removed to federal court by any of the “co-conspirators”. We think the number of alleged “co-conspirators” could well be in the five digit neighborhood judging by the list of ISPs attached to the Agreed Order.

Arte de Oaxaca v. Stacey Mullen (Cook county IL)

Case No: 12-L-9034
Attorney for Plaintiff: Paul Duffy
Attorney for Defendant: Adam Urbanzcyk
Judge: Lynn M. Egan
Dismissed: 03/13/2013

Guava LLC v. Spencer Merkel (Hennepin county MN)

Case No: 27-CV-12-20976
Attorney for Plaintiff: Michael Dugas
Attorney for Defendant: Trina Morrison
Judge: Tanya Bransford

Guava LLC (petitioner) v Comcast Cable Communications LLC (respondent) (St. Clair county IL)

Case No: 12-MR-417
Attorneys for Petitioner: Paul Duffy, Kevin Hoerner
Attorney for Respondent:
Judge: Andrew J. Gleeson

LW Systems v. Christopher Hubbard (St. Clair County IL)

Case No: 13-L-0015
Attorneys for Plaintiff: Paul Duffy, Kevin Hoerner
Attorney for Defendant: Adam Urbanzcyk
Judge: Andrew J. Gleeson



Other resources
  • Morgan Pietz created a page dedicated to this case. He is accepting defendants, and based on his performance in California, to say that I recommend him is a huge understatement.
LW Systems v. Juan Leonard (Maricopa County AZ)


Attorneys who defend Does
  • (IL) Adam E. Urbanczyk — attorney for the only named defendant, Skyler Case. I do not recommend using his services: Adam is almost certainly “in bed” with Prenda — scaring and pushing people to settle. Don’t let the fact that Adam U is listed on the EFF site deceive you: attorneys on the “Subpoena Defense” page are self-listed, and being on this list does not imply EFF’s endorsement.
  • (IL) Erin Russell — IMO she is good. She keeps us informed about this case in the comments to this page. Don’t miss her comments.
  • (IL — St. Clair county) Morgan E. Pietz, a California attorney, one of the best: no introduction necessary in case you read this blog regularly. If not, check the “Coopergate” post series.
  • (IL) Jeffrey Antonelli: an attorney from Chicago.
  • (MN) Paul Godfread.
  • (MN) Mark Santi of Thompson Hall Santi Cerny & Dooley.
  • (MN) Scott M. Flaherty of Briggs and Morgan.
Relevant posts

These cases are farcical and can be fought and defeated. There is simply no way anyone can be found liable by any jury. Pure, perfect bluff.
Do not talk to trolls. Do not succumb to fears. Do not settle. This house of cards is going to collapse soon and I hope Prenda will be pursued criminally.


1,039 responses to ‘Guava LLC, Arte de Oaxaca, LW Holdings and other Prenda’s bogus corporations

  1. In ALSD (12-cv-678) on 1-7 Judge Nelson denies expedited discovery by Prenda of Doe and the “Co-conspirators” for a variety of reasons. Favorite quote:

    “It appears common for multiple authorized users n a single home or office to use the same
    ISP account, and it is the understanding of the court that it has become increasingly
    common for other persons with nefarious intent to hack into an unprotected or
    inadequately-protected home network or wifi hotspot to make use of an IP address that is
    thus not traceable to them. The court thus questions whether plaintiff can show either that
    limited discovery is likely to ascertain the correct party, see e.g., Quad Int’l Inc. v. Doe,
    supra (applying four factors as test for pre-service discovery), or that the substitution of
    such a party for the John Doe defendant would satisfy the requirements of Rule 11 and
    the rule announced in Iqbal/Twombly.”

    • That’s a judge who actually took the time to research the technical aspects and other cases. In other words, a great judge :)

  2. Any updates on the Guava vs Comcast case? now with all this recent development on Prenda and John Steele and Merkel coming out on the offense. I couldn’t find much on Pacer.

    • A crucial hearing is set to February 13th. According to buzz, fireworks are expected. I have no more info on this one.

      You can’t find it on Pacer, it is not a federal case, but St. Clair county IL court. And getting documents it is not a straightforward task. Obscurity is the part of trolls’ game.

  3. Got a call from a Chicago phone number, didn’t answer it. Possibly Prenda? 312 568 7007

    • according to a quick Google search, someone posted this yesterday on about this number: ” said I entered a contest for a free cruise, I did not. I tried to call them back to have
      my CELL number removed, no I have to pay
      minutes to be bothered as I am trying to
      cook dinner. will this ever end?”

    • Or is it too late an hour for something like that and this was just coincidence, you think?

  4. Does anyone know if it makes a difference if the ISP says they are only giving out your “adress and name” but not your phone #? Does this mean they will only send letters? Or they just look up your phone # with your info and try to call anyways? The paper work seems to state specifically that only name and adress will be provided but not phone #.

    • They operate like debt collectors and attorneys who represent credit card defaults (it’s a very similar business model), and they use databases like Lexis Nexis to get your info. So, if they get your name and address, one way or another they will get your phone number. One way around it is to change your number, have it made unlisted and never associate with your bank account, store gift cards/pre-paid debit cards, or any other institution that reports to Lexis Nexis or similar databases.

      • So I checked lexisnexis and WOW they have all the info you can possibly think. How is that legal? Does this also mean that if I buy a car tomorrow, trolls will get notified?

        • If they want to be notified, you can bet on it. That is exactly how they choose who to go after, by seeing what kind of assets and disposable income you have.

        • I agree with jamming. When first getting information for an innocent relative about the troll scam, I spoke with a private investigator. Property records(assets that are a matter of public record) are easily accessed by trolls or other creeps. If they can easily find a Doe’s job position or employer, they may be able to estimate salary. Some (Doe) financial assets, such as stocks and mutual funds, may be more difficult to (legally) get info for.

          It’s important to take care until the troll threat is distant. Definitely if there was a major home, land, auto or boat purchase coming up, plan to either postpone it or (legally) shelter it under family or business. Give onlooking troll sleazebags less to work with.

          By all means, think about fighting troll demands, such as by actively filing (with or without an attorney) or by waiting things out. Just be cautious to make the troll target attempts harder.

        • Much has been made about the trolls conducting extensive background checks on Does but I am fairly certain lots of omissions and short cuts are taken. For example both Prenda and Lipscomb have sued individuals who obviously are very, very poor or could not possibly have infringed (i.e. blind). Likewise Prenda is suing Adam Sekora when even the most cursory of Google searches would reveal that to be a very big mistake.

  5. The irony, of course, is that trolls try very hard to avoid exactly the same revelations that they try to force from Does. Trolls try to hide ownership, business name and organization, financial reporting, etc. They hide financial shares (and incentives) of extortion settlements to lawyers and forensic operators are also hidden. It’s outrageous that courts let essentially unknown front businesses file hundreds of cases with little or no merit against productive citizens.

    By the way, the private investigator let me know, when these video troll cases were new, that the existence of trolls and their shady tactics were already widely known in the PI community.

    • It really wouldn’t matter, to be honest. The end game here is to get you to settle and blink in the game of chicken, the only way they can do anything to your car (in terms of a lien or seizure) is if they get a default judgment and you file bankruptcy or they take you to court and win. Now, they’ve never pursued any of these to trial (impending Bellwether excepted) and as long as you stay on it you’re not going to default, so you’ve got nothing to worry about on that front. They are looking at it more from a perspective of “He can afford to drive a 2 year old Infiniti, he should be good for $8500 in settlement easy.”

    • Very interesting to see the difference between an actual defense attorney and Adam Urbanzcyk. Has he ever taken proactive steps to defend a case? Even one MTQ? Seriously, what has he ever done to defend a case?

      • All AU has done to defend a case is sell out hundreds of other people and throw them under the bus.

    • Read it. Some clients can only afford the metaphorical NAA Guardian while I prefer to see the M72 LAW used against Prenda ilk.

      • The list of Prenda/Steele/Gibbs/Guava/etc. misdeeds is so long that defense counsel can only mention some of them, to keep motions shorter than the Chicago phone book.

        Mr. Antonelli puts it politely in saying:

        “Finally, it is incredible that an attorney not licensed in the state of Illinois would propound a subpoena from Superior Court of Marin County [California] to a Georgia ISP. Plaintiff’s conduct is worrisome.”

  6. So I think the first round of settlement letters went out with the comcast case. I just received mine today and it was from Guava based in Washington DC.

  7. In case you did not notice it in the above subtopic listings, Prenda filed LW Systems v. Juan Leonard (Case no. CV2013-051244) on 1-24 in Maricopa County, AZ. Listed attorney is Steven Goodhue who is a well known Prenda stooge having initially signed on for the “successful” Lightspeed Media Corp., lawsuits in Maricopa County, AZ. So far no one has been served and there is no “agreed upon” discovery order. But there will be shortly I would guess. Quite sure Prenda has a few more of these LW Systems lawsuits hidden in other local courts. MN is the next logical place to look.

  8. I received my settlement letter today for the Guava vs Comcast discovery request. 12-MR-417. In the original documents, they claim that my connection hacked into their computer with stolen passwords, violating the CFAA. In the settlement letter, they alleged that my connection was observed distributing their files via BitTorrent, with no mention of the CFAA or password hacking. They can’t even keep their story straight. So now, they are looking to squeeze me for $4k.

    Any advice on how I should respond to their letter? “I didn’t do it, don’t know who did it, so F-off!”?

    • I recieved the same letter and I’m scared shit less couldn’t even sleep will I actually get sued?? I’m really scared the owner of the acc doesn’t have money at all why would they come after us

      • do not respond to their letter at all, the best response is no response. the likelyhood of them actually suing you is very very low, almost zero percent low. that being said you need to save any letters they send you because if they do sue you, you can use that letter to show that they are infact sueing for copyright even if they claim they are not and can get the case dismissed. the comcast case still may get thrown out depending on how the motions go (and they are good motions). do nothing, take a deep breath, and try to get some sleep.

        • Thanx man this made me feel better cause I read the letter and mine said “Our computers where breached and our file were stolen.Our engineers observed your Internet acc distributing these files via BitTorrent.”
          They also went on to say we issued subpoenas and my ISP turned over records confirming that I was the acc holder. 12MR417 is what it say at top….honostly how worried should I be

        • They also say on the 2nd page “Please be on notice: due to the nature of this matter, we are referring this matter to our attorneys to for further prosecution against you in 21 days if we do not hear from you…..
          Do you still think the chances of me getting sued are zero percent? I’m scared out of my mind couldn’t sleep today can only imagine these next 21days… How did they know who the acc holder was cause this not is from Guava LLC from Washington, D.C. … It also says at the start of the note this wade filled on Nov 20, 2012 and its to put me on notice of pending litigation

        • for starters, there is pretty much no way to tie bittorrent uploads to a password theft claim. so they didn’t “observe you distributing via bittorrent” and observe you hacking “their” site. guava is a non existant entity and as such lacks the standing to actually sue. they are not and have not been very successfull on single person cfaa suits. unfortunately nothing is 100% certain, but there is a very very low possibility that you will be singled out. they just don’t have the staff to individually sue the 1000’s of people they are tring to extort via these suits. these suits are even weaker than the pure bittorrent suits and so i would not worry. i was involved in one of the very first cfaa suits and nothing has come of it, and i will hit my statute of lim date by the end of this year.

        • I can’t wait until someone who’s been a target in these “CFAA” cases nails these cocksuckers with a lawsuit for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, fraud, civil conspiracy, defamation, a whole gaggle of Constitutional violations notably First Amendment privacy violations, and whatever else a tort lawyer can think up (it’ll be a long LONG list).

      • Ah! Those first 21 days. Depending on how paranoid you are (and believe me, I was paranoid) you start picturing the worst. You picture a SWAT team surrounding your house, full gear, banging on your door… the lead cop bangs on your door and says “We have a warrant for all the computers in this house! Let us in now or we break the door down!” Then your computers get into their hands. Any little thing you searched for used against you, even if you’re innocent!

        This is, of course, not how it would go down even if they decided to go forward with a case against you (which as others will point out, is around a 1% chance. Less so if you live in a troll unfriendly place like California.) Now, there are a few courses of action here as people will tell you: Pay them off or ignore it. The former can give you some “piece of mind”, while the latter saves you money and they won’t likely go after you — but I would be lying if I said that if you choose to ignore it you won’t think about it often. They will send you another letter, increasing the settlement amount after 21 days. Your anxiety will be back again. Then if you ignore that, they will call you saying they’re going to be moving forward with the suit. Your anxiety will rise again. I’ve gotten a few calls, my anxiety levels rise and it does no good for my health – even though I’m innocent. Whether they care to acknowledge it or not, innocent people can be scared out of their minds because they don’t understand the shadowy law system. You picture private investigators digging through your life to paint you as a bad person. Then you picture it going to trial, you not having any money for a lawyer, them being awarded hundreds of thousands of dollars that you don’t have. Essentially: You picture them ruining your life. I could see why some people have said they’ve considered taking their lives when getting these letters. I have been to those dark places. But, then there was this site, DieTrollDie, Cashman, etc. that assuaged my fears.

        I’ll tell you why these trolls drive me nuts the most. Do they really think that $4,000… $6,000… up to these new settlement letters some have gotten for $30,000… fit the crime? They do not. Even if a person was guilty, they could throw themselves at the mercy of the court, point to their willingness to atone, state their monetary hardship – and likely only wind up with a charge of less than a thousand dollars. (I remember one case recently where the trolls were awarded $617 – saw it on SJD’s twitter feed, maybe she can give more context for that.) This is why I truly believe they don’t take many of these to court. They are worried that even if the person is guilty, the awarded amount will be small and other Does will get wind of that short return so when the trolls call to say they could be liable for up to “$150,000”, the more informed Does will shrug it off.

        I’m telling you all this to say not to worry. If you can afford a lawyer, by all means retain one (you can contact the EFF for the best one… click on your state above here and you can see what lawyers for your state this site recommends.) Have them need to contact him or her instead for future reference. If you can’t obtain one your only option is to wait. They will constantly harass you by mail and over the phone, but if you’ve ever had to duck a bill collector before then this is similar. You really only have to worry if they actually serve you in person. You can keep up to date on RFCexpress (it’s free to look up cases) and search for any cases with the plantiff’s name on any dockets. I do this once a day because I’m a meticulous person. If all you see from that plantiff is just more filings against Does, it’s just the troll gathering more names to harass.

        Stay calm, stay strong. Do not speak with them, do not answer their future phone calls. (You can find the usual numbers they call from elsewhere on this site, but to be safe it’s best to just ignore any numbers you don’t know.) Come back here if you need any advice in the future and one of us will be sure to help you or direct you to someone who can.

        • i called Jeffrey Antonelli he gave me some advice told me basically the letter says they will sue my for shring the files that where stolen from them thru bit torrent which i never did and that its hard to say what the intentions are or if i will get sued cause they dont know how many letter they sent out or how many people are involved get lawyer though explained everything well and how these people “Guava LLC” might not be broke or understaff cause this guy Brent Grimes or whatever that signed the letter has made alot of money doing this to people which freaked me even more wished me the best though and hopes nothing happens im really scared again since he said it not for password theft and for something different now!

  9. He also said that if i didnt hack they’re websites they cant sue me but the company of the videos i shared can which i know i didnt hack they’re website dont know how and basically he said im innocent if i didnt do that but i would have to see abou the uploading and sharingnthrough bitorrnt which is bs i dont do that at all

  10. We will put our exponentially growing team of lawyers on this and they will sue you till there is nothing left to sue, LOL, blow me.

  11. Has anyone compiled a list somewhere of numbers they have received harassment calls from? It would be nice to have some of them saved just in case.

  12. With all these questions ive asked should i sill be worried or no? i just wanna know if im involved in any of these cases listed?

    • Well if you look at the facts, Guava is at the very most a shell corporation but likely it doesn’t even exist at all. There’s an affidavit of a named (non-forum) defendant who states that he agreed to be sued in order to have a claim in another case dismissed (that’s not an enforceable agreement and is grounds for permanent disbarment). So if they do sue you, which I HIGHLY doubt they will after the aforementioned Merkel bombshell in MN along with the fact that Guava does not even exist, they’re WIDE OPEN to a MASSIVE class action for, but not limited to: malicious prosecution, abuse of process, fraud, and intentional infliction of emotion distress.

      If the Arte de Oaxaca case is anything like Guava (and now LW Systems aka Steele, Inc.), then the list of IPs is very likely (read: most certainly) total bullshit and IF there are timestamps, they are bullshit. Educated guess, based on my years’ of experience dealing with these douchebags. After the shit hit the fan when Merkel (the “Guava” defendant in MN who agreed to be sued in exchange for being dropped from HDP v. Does 1-1495 in DCD) filed an affidavit stating that this has to do with a site that shut down early last year, so it’s literally impossible for someone to be downloading something from a site that is literally not functional. It’s like trying to…shit, I’m not too witty tonight.

      Duffy sued a Doe in DCD in an individual Guava case, drew Judge Howell and subsequently got a massive hard-on which she quickly rendered limp when she denied his ex parte request on the grounds that there wasn’t a sworn declaration from a computer forensics expert, which he never filed. By “computer forensics expert” I mean Peter Hansmeier, who is NOT an expert in computer forensics as he has no certifications, no formal education at all, and as far as any of us can tell, his company that he lists in every declaration, well, it doesn’t even exist. At least not in Dun & Bradstreet’s database, which would have it. It’s not in the Secretary of State databases for Arizona, California, Illinois, Minnesota, or Florida. So guess what Duffy does? Lets it sit on the docket, no action since October. GEE I WONDER WHY!! Or maybe “6881 Forensics, LLC” is a pseudonym? Well, that’s not good (for Prenda and Hansmeier) either. So, either way, Hansmeier is in deep shit when it’s discovered that Prenda’s “computer forensics firm” does not, nor can it specialize in computer forensics for two reasons. One, it does not exist. Two, even if it did, Hansmeier is not an expert. He is very likely being compensated pro rata, more settlements = more money = incentive to implicate more people = federal crime = lots more fun stuff. Hundreds, maybe thousands of charges of subornation of perjury and that’s the tip of the iceberg (see: RICO Act).

      So, to answer your question, I wouldn’t worry unless a process server drops off a summons or UPS drops off a copy of a subpoena that Prenda, err, the Anti-Piracy Law Group, err, Prenda (sorry I can’t keep the names straight, it’s like “pop” and “soda” completely interchangeable). If you can weather the “This is Jeff Schultz (Mark Lutz lying about his name) from Prenda Law….” calls for 18 months and the demand letters, you’re fine.

  13. The guy who signed my guava letter though is some Brett or Brent guy same thing applies all the same stuff

    • As Jason Sweet elegantly put it (talking about AF Holdings, but can be extended to Guava, no doubt),

      The parties are a plaintiff without standing and a defendant without fault.

      • can you put that in different terms SJD lol im kinda new to this and am going through a ruff stretch which the JD comment made me more nervious lol

      • Several Guava LLC v Doe cases filed in Minnesota today by troll Michael Dugas. Interestingly, the complaint gives his email address as mkdugas@livewireholdings dot com…

  14. Can you put it in simpler terms SJD the JD comment made me more nervous and now i don’t know if i will get sleep should i be worried about the individual case filings?

    • So far federal Guava cases have been nothing but disaster for Prenda: they are so obviously frivolous, a first year law student or even educated pro se can easily defeat them. It’s a fake corporation, a naked king. Period. It does not exist, and therefore cannot sue (“standing” in Legalese). Of course someone must point it to the judge. Scroll up and read TAD’s comment: I think he has clearly explained what Guava is and why fearing it is like fearing a shadow.

      • Yea I read TADs comments very well said but I’m new to this cause I got a letter in the mail from Guava trying to get me to settle for 4k I’m not going 2 of course and if they’re fake what are these individual cases being filed about the AJD is talking about I’m just really freaked trying to learn to deal with the stress that comes with these threats

        • You will be fine, just don’t make any decisions in a haste: you have plenty of time to get converted from freaked to pissed.

        • Thanx hopefully nothing comes out of this from what you and TAD have said has made me feel sooo much better gotten a lot of advice from my fam to just to stop worrying about it and if it comes down to it we will talk to a lawyer if I get served lol btw your comment about fearing Guava is like fearing a shadow made me laugh and feel like I’m taking this way more serious than I should lol I was sooo stressed the day I got that settlement letter I turned yellow couldn’t sleep and almost called 3 different lawyers for free consultation but from listening to experienced people that have delt with this it will goes alway mostly half the time if you learn to ignore them unless you get served

        • One more question I was reading some other comment not in this post but another is there a thing as Most Dangerous state to live in like will living in a certain state increase the chances of me getting sued individually or anything else for that matter hopefully the next answer will help me more and end my stress this question is for anyone that knows SJD if you could answer this it would help Thanx

  15. Here are the list of Guava cases file this month.
    only 1 in illinois. not sure what to make of it.
    they are all against doe defendants though.
    it looks like a few are against people who ignored the summon from Prenda.

    12 Guava, LLC (pla) mndce 0:2013-cv-00318 370 02/07/2013
    13 Guava, LLC (pla) mndce 0:2013-cv-00319 370 02/07/2013
    14 Guava, LLC (pla) mndce 0:2013-cv-00320 370 02/07/2013
    15 Guava, LLC (pla) mndce 0:2013-cv-00321 370 02/07/2013
    16 Guava, LLC (pla) mndce 0:2013-cv-00322 370 02/07/2013
    17 Guava, LLC (pla) mndce 0:2013-cv-00313 370 02/06/2013
    18 Guava LLC (pla) caedce 2:2013-cv-00224 890 02/05/2013
    19 Guava LLC (pla) caedce 2:2013-cv-00226 890 02/05/2013
    20 GUAVA LLC (pla) ilndce 1:2013-cv-00952 890 02/05/2013

    • Don’t have the time to check at the moment, but this is in the new guava cases:

      In the course of monitoring individuals seeking unauthorized access to Plaintiff’s websites, Plaintiff’s agents observed unlawful reproduction and distribution occurring over IP address x.

      It’s almost like they’re trying to go for CFAA AND torrent now.

      • Well I never got summoned and I barely got my settlement in the mail so i might still be in the clear right ?but is there a such thing as worst state to live in that might increase the chances of being sued individually or anything else for that matter?

  16. and one final last question about the settlement letter at the beginning it says that a lawsuit against involving me was filed in st clair Guava LLC v. Comcast Cable Communications was filed on Nov 20 2012 and said the purpose of the letter was to put me on notice impending litigation,And also goes on to say sometime mid 2012 they subpoenaed my ip address because they’re companies computers were breached and they files were stolen and “observed me distributing these files through bittorrent”, Now what i dont get is yes you guys say don’t worry and im trying not to but as days go its still stuck in the back of my mind are they basically saying that im involved in this Comcast one or something else? please help me out i know i’ve probably asked this more than once but a bit more clarification can help….what exactly are they trying to say that i did and if i did something different why am i involved in the Comcast one which im not saying i did anything at all its just all so confusing and how many people are thought to be involved in this Comcast suit…and normally do settlement letter include the copy of the petition?

    • Is the letter you received from Prenda or from Comcast? If it’s from Prenda, it’s a scare tactic, but they typically only name less than 1%. If you don’t talk to them (definitely do not), you are likely to be fine. If it’s from Comcast, it means Prenda has issued a subpoena to them to get your info, and unless you file and succeed at a motion to quash, they will give your info to Prenda, at which point Prenda will start harassing you, but likely will do nothing beyond that.

      I know it’s easy to think “yeah, but what it…”, but I’d take pleasure in that fact that these assclowns seem to finally be running out of luck, and will hopefully be in a federal-pound-me-in-the-ass prison before spring.

      • The letter i got a straight from guava signed by Brett Gibbs house of council for guava or something like that lol,It came with like 5 pages i think and some of them are the petition that can be found on this page under the Guava V. Comcast

        • So in other words what i was thinking is hey they have my name and address why would they be trying to get it from comcast cause I’m guessing that is what the battle with comcast is about and no I’m thinking this is a scare tactic including a current case and say that I’m involved in but they already have my info lol make no sense even included the settlement saying you have 21days and the petition papers all in a big envelope that says Guava LLC from washington DC

  17. Thanx in advance who ever answers this hopefully ASAP this is the question and thought that im really eager to get answered

  18. Another question what is this whole battle about what is Guava trying to say happen someone stole usernames and passwords? or what i read the petition they mention too much different stuff like interruption of their service too confusing

    • Does anyone know how many people are involved in this Comcast one too since we can’t see the ips I think in the petition it says like the main hacker or something is in St Clair county

      • What that translates to is “the st clair courts are corrupt and a good place to get away with this extortion scheme.” There is no main hacker, and even if there was, they dont know or care who it is. They pick a random ip address that might be near st clair (because their geolocating service is google, which isnt all that accurate), and tell a corrupt judge that they have undeniable proof that that is the person responsible for everything.

        • Cause I got a letter in the mail where it asks me to settle for 4k saying tap merging about this case came with the petition to the case too and my main question and what’s helping me get sleep is that I’m no where near st Clair but in Illinois are they just sending these letters to people they have addresses to in Illinois and trying to scare them to settle by showing you the petition and saying hey this is against you but I’m a long way from st Clair but in the same state

      • In the discovery letter I got from comcast for the Guava vs Comcast case, it listed about 50 IPs on one page, our IP was highlighted by a yellow marker, possibly by comcast. but it was only one sheet. not sure if comcast only sends the page with your IP address or if that’s all there is. if this is your case, can you send me via email the last 4 digits of the first IP on your list and tell me how many IPs are listed on your sheet. That way I can estimate about how many people are being targeted. my email is

        • I didn’t recieve that it was just a letter saying hey you are involved in this but which I highly doubt cause fr what I’ve heard I have a low chance it just says this is your ip you were trading our stolen files which I wasn’t and we usually don’t offer settlements this early but 4k and we won’t pursue you but no list if ips just the petition and this was straight from Guava supposedly located in DC

        • What confuses me is why Prenda is sending you this. If they are, it means they already have your info. The way this document reads, it looks like Comcast is notifying you that they lost this motion to dismiss, and unless you succeed at a motion to quash, they will be forced to give up your info (bottom para. 3).

          I’m assuming the respondent was comcast or other involved ISPs and the petitioner was Prenda. If I’m correct, all this is is Prenda showing you that they beat that motion to dismiss and comcast had to give them your info. It’s not a summons naming you in a lawsuit, and it doesn’t require you to do anything, but instead is just more scare tactics. They’re just saying “Look, a scary legal document, give us $4k!” The only people bound by this are the ISPs who had to give the info to Prenda (bottom para. 2), and Prenda who had to pay the ISPs a reasonable amount to do so (bottom para. 7).

        • Thank you for making it sound soooo clear helps me feel a bit better and that what i though is hey they include this to scare me but i never filed a motion or anything they said they subpoenaed my info back in august and some more info back when they filed this lawsuit but you already know my name and address and this battle with Comcast is to get more names addresses soooo i was like im sooooo confused but i emailed SJD to ask him question alot but maybe she can clear a lot of those up cause ive made of made one mistake calling a person from Torrent litigation but none since then cause it was they day i was scared and didnt know what was happening tip i found this site

        • Listen, I cannot answer endless questions. Nothing personal, but for 5 days you should have already understood what’s going on clearly.

          Even if I replied, I would reiterate the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over again anyway:

          – Guava is a sham corporation.
          – Brett Gibbs is about to be seriously sanctioned or even imprisoned.
          – Prenda are criminals.
          – If you don’t admit wrongdoing, they cannot do anything to you.
          – The probability to be named personally is about 1%.
          – Actually it WAS 1%, now it is near zero: it is all circus now because all kinds of authorities are after these criminals.
          – Even if named, they have NOTHING on you.
          – Generally, you are one of 300,000 targeted for this kind of extortion.

          Yes, calling Urbanczyk was not the best thing, as he is a part of the problem, but it does not change anything.

        • K that answered everything sorry for bugging you and also same thing applies for the BitTorrent crap right same as %1 or at least zero now? And also where can I contact you so you can delete some of the comments I’ve made earlier…. Just calling AU was making me nervous I didn’t tell him my name anyway lol. Found ou Saturday he might have been the person I spoke too and I was like OMG I think I just increased me chances lol but the phone number I called him on wasn’t the one on the site in fact looked it up it said Warrenville so freaked me even more !!!

  19. Looks like @bittorrentbetty has been deleted now, too. I wonder if this was done as Steele noticed that Paul Godfread’s interrogatory into his social media accounts for the Alan Cooper case in Hennepin County, MN…

  20. When is the next comcast hearing? Is this just gonna go on for 8months and nothingnwill happen or what? Kinda wanna knowa what someone who is well known with that case is thinking please respond thanx in advance

    • If Guava doesn’t sue individually why are they’re some being filed and I know you say they don’t file CFAA suits a lot but what about someone being accused of BitTorrent do they file those and do they succeed in those what the chances if them coming after you for that by them I mean Guava or prenda since I guess they’re the same

      • They sued individual Does who retained a specific attorney in the Cook County case, as retaliation against her. They have NEVER succeeded in a P2P suit. EVER. Not one single defendant has ever gone to trial. They cannot claim that you downloaded a file via P2P after they’ve filed suit against you under the CFAA. CFAA doesn’t cover P2P. They can’t sit there and claim “Well, so and so downloaded a copyrighted file via P2P, which was downloaded using a stolen password, so defendant is vicariously liable.” No, it doesn’t work like that. No case law supports it. It’s preposterous to say the least. They didn’t claim copyright infringement for a reason. In fact, they claimed that financial data was stolen. Porn movies are now…eh, uh….OK. The CFAA claims are shotgun-pled with the complaints literally citing entire sections of the statute. Well, which fucking section? What’s the damage breakdown? The IP lists don’t have timestamps either so, well, it could be made up? Who knows. I tore apart the Guava v. Case complaint a while back and I’m not even an attorney, all of it is crap but especially the CFAA claim.

        These Guava cases won’t reach trial, they can’t. It’s because these defendants, well at least Merkel, entered into an unenforceable, illegal, and highly unethical contract with Dugas (Prenda) to be sued in order to be dismissed from the HDP v. Does 1-1495 case that was voluntarily dismissed in DCD. Now, wild guess here, but if they manufactured one defendant, what are the odds that others are manufactured? If one of these individual cases ever reached discovery, Prenda would be in so much shit it’s not funny which is precisely why they wouldn’t allow a Guava case to go to discovery. ALL of the dirty laundry would be aired out and Prenda would be royally fucked when one of the named defendants is deposed by a pit bull attorney. We’re talking worse than what’s going on out in California with Gibbs (and he’s facing almost certain Rule 11 sanctions and probably a criminal contempt charge at the very least).

  21. I recieved another voicemail tonight. It amazes me that they can’t keep track of the number of settlements that they have offered me. Is anyone else running into this? Even if I were in the wrong here, I wouldn’t agree to a settlement due to the lack of professionalism.

    • The got my name wrong. I have Comcast Business Class and Comcast has the account listed as “Business Name”, Address, State. Comcast of course gave this information to them exactly as that. Since a business that doesn’t exist doesn’t have standing, Guava decided to try and be smart-asses about it and googled businesses with similar names in my area. Needless to say, they found one, found the owner of that business (listed in their website) and are addressing their voicemails to that person, trying to scare the pants off this business account owner. I was able to reverse engineer their tactics in about 2 searches with the name they left on my voicemail, and the name of my business.

  22. To those people wondering why you are just now receiving things about this, and have not heard about it from before, here is the timeline of events for the Guava vs Comcast petition and the approximate dates you should have received the notifications. If you did not receive the notifications by the listed deadlines, CONTACT COMCAST’S LEGAL TEAM AND LET THEM KNOW OF THESE CLINICAL ERRORS. If you are only now getting word of this after getting a settlement letter, ITS COMCAST’S FAULT that you were not notified in time to file an MTQ.

    Nov 20, 2012 – Guava says hey judge, these IP addresses stole passwords from us, and committed a crime against the CFAA, can we have the names and addresses of the account holders.

    Dec. 12, 2012 – Judge says hey Comcast, give up the identities of these IP address account holders. btw, heres some deadlines. This document is titled “Order Granting Petition” above.

    Dec. 26, 2012 – All people involved in this discovery request should have received paperwork from Comcast in a big manila envelope containing the documents titled “Petition”, and “Order Granting Petition” above, and addressed to the account holder.

    Jan 25, 2013 – This is the deadline by which you should have sent in a motion to quash and notified Comcast about it. If you filed a MTQ by this date, Comcast will not have handed over your details to Guava (this would be those 17 people) until ordered to do so by the court.

    Jan 30, 2013 – Comcast hand’s over the Name, Address, Telephone number, Comcast Email address, and Comcast modem MAC address, of anybody who did not file a MTQ.

    Feb 6, 2013 – The date I received my first settlement letter, addressed to myself, the Comcast account holder. In it was a demand letter, 1st page printed on nice letterhead, 2nd page on regular shitty printer paper. A form to fill out to either mail or fax my money to pay them off, and a copy of the above “Petition” form.

    Feb 7, 2013 – The date I received my first settlement call letting me know I can contact them with any questions or concerns. This did not sound like a recording as the caller addressed me by name and mentioned my reference number, matching the reference number on the settlement letter they sent me the day before.

    Now, I wait. We’ll see what other bullshit this brings from them. With any hope, Brett Gibbs, the guy who signed my extortion demand, will be sitting in prison or at least de-barred in a couple months.

    • This is pretty much how it did go down. I have a copy of them myself as one of the does present in this case, and this is pretty much how it’s gone down.

      Knowing I personally haven’t done a thing in this extortion case, i’ve been watching and using this site as a benchmark on what to do. Waiting all the same, my first call was at roughly 12:00 PM at this day last week, and I’ve not received a second. will post after I find that voicemail again on where they wanted me to call them. Needless to say, i’ve not said a word.

  23. Do not answer any phone calls these trolls make. Let it go to voicemail if you do not know the number. You will them have that voicemail which can be used as evidence later.


    They are then in violation of 815 ILCS 305 (Automatic Telephone Dialers Act), as that is an unsolicited prerecorded message. It also states, they are automatically in violation of Section 2Z of the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. “All remedies, penalties and authority granted to the Attorney General by that [CFDBPA] Act shall be available to him for the enforcement of this [815 ILCS 305] Act.

    If they call you with a prerecorded message IN ILLINOIS, have it on voicemail, and file a complaint with the Attorney General’s office.

  24. I also recieved ANOTHER call/voicemail just now. (I am the person who made this post, where the caller said their name was “Jeff Shultz” with Prenda law, for those keeping track )

    Anyways, they called from the same phone number (numbers on my caller ID match) it was 100% undoubtedly the same person…again… but this time he did not give a name but claimed to be “The Anti-Piracy Law Group calling in reguards to the violations of computer fraud and abuse act”
    He never mentioned Prenda or Guava, but other than that the message was the same as the last one I got. Stating “the offer to settle expired” and “just wanted to give you a quick call before we do move forward and file a complaint with your name in it” and “if you want avoid the time and expense that is associated with a case like this, please call us back.
    We can be reached at 1-800-380-0840 and your reference # is XXXX”

    I will type out a full verbatim dictation of it later, as I am at work currently, and I will also get an audio copy of it emailed to who I emailed the last one to for the sake of comparing and archiving…

    Not only did he use a completly different “law firm name” this time, he seemingly had NO idea that he had ever called me before LOL!

    • I also need to check over the Settlement docs they mailed me to see if Brett Gibbs was the one to sign/issue mine as well…. Or was he only involved with the Comcast customers (my ISP is not Comcast, I have sombody else…)

  25. doeanonnony tweeted that Ruggiero filed a Federal case in NY on 2/8/13. Looking through Internet Archive, there are 23 FEDERAL Guava cases listed (though only 2 are listed on RFC). I didn’t realize there had been so many Federal filings to date.

    The cases were filed in October 2012 and February 2013. The complaints The complaints all list the computer hacking ill-willed allegations typical of the Guava scheme. States where cases have been filed by the usual local Prenda trolls include MA, NY, CA, OH, IL, MI, MN, AZ, GA and DC.

    Ruggiero has filed cases in 4 states: CT, NY, MA and PA.

      • No doubt, but don’t forget that he is not the one who writes all these apoplectic pleadings. Shadow writers in Minneapolis have been busy lately.

    • If you uncheck all of the boxes on RFC express you’ll see 18 federal cases. I’m not sure where the other five are.

      The majority of the Guava cases get listed as “other statutory actions.” Only some of the first salvo of cases and the new one by Ruggeiro were listed as copyright.

    • If you uncheck all of the boxes on RFC express you’ll see 18 federal guava cases. They’re listed as “other statutory actions.” I’m not sure where the other five are.

      The three that show up as copyright are from the earlier salvo from October and the new Ruggeiro case.

    • Actually only two are missing. There’s the three copyright and the 18 “others.” Don’t know where the other two are.

    • The SDNY Guava case has been assigned to Judge Engelmayer who looks like he is perfect to sort through the Prenda tomfoolery:

      “From 1989 until 1994, Engelmayer worked as a federal prosecutor in Manhattan, serving as an assistant U.S. attorney from 1989 until 1994 but also serving as deputy chief appellate attorney in 1994. From 1994 until 1996, Engelmayer was an Assistant to the United States Solicitor General Drew S. Days, III.
      Engelmayer returned to the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan in 1996, serving as the chief of the major crimes unit from 1996 until 2000, according to his Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire.”

    • Yeah, I’m mobile with spotty internet at the moment. I realize that now. And the 18 in other also included the copyright ones.

      RFC says it found 18 but only displays 10.

      Sorry about that.

  26. Today’s Guava v. Comcast hearing in the St. Clair county was superquick. Judge Gleeson did not read the motions, said he wasn’t prepared and asked everyone to come back next week. That’s it. 2/21.

    Comcast’s local attorney (don’t know the name at the moment).

    Doe attorneys (~6) including Thomas Leverso, Erin Russell, and Morgan Pietz.
    One pro se Doe.

    Guava attorneys: John Steele and Kevin Hoerner.

    Steele said on the record that he is “of counsel” for Prenda.

    • SJD, is there any significance in this delay? I know St Clair might be corrupt. is it possible that the judge is troll friendly and is giving the trolls enough time to run the extortion scheme. A lot of us got settlement letter that is suppose to expire on 2/21. I was waiting on hearing what the outcome of today’s hearing before deciding what to do. shield / ignore / settle

      • Hard to tell. This court is indeed corrupt overall, but I wouldn’t paint all the judges with a wide brush. LeChien’s conduct is undoubtedly questionable, but I don’t know anything about this judge.

        The “deadline” is a fiction though – everyone who has been living through harassment will tell you that.

        And settling with criminals who will cease to exist in a couple of months is… [you can finish this sentence for me]

      • One thing I’ve been told is not to settle I was waiting for the outcome too but I don’t think settling should even be considered unless you gave them something to work with they’re just trying to scare people SJD has gave me a lot of advice and so has TAD scroll through the comments just don’t talk to them and like SJD told me its a %1 chance of being named unless you gave them something they don’t have anything on you don’t give them free money for me personally I was freaked when I got this I was having a good first month if the year and then this came in the mail turnt sick and couldn’t sleep the first day but SJD and other’s have opened my eyes and can’t thank them enough I’ve literally been on this site about half my days for the past week asking what will happen in this Comcast case but I was told this is similar to the Lightspeed v Comcast etc where nothing has happened in 8+ months

    • Trolls attack with dozens of new lawsuits files in multiple states…will this crap every end…when will our politicians, justice dept and judges stop all this evil coming from these souless, talentless and completely emotional bankrupt individuals….I found new cases doing search thru RFC Express

  27. Hey the date and time on these Guava settlement letter are the fictional or real lol mine says like so and so of 2012 and then the time is in 24hr format

    • Is’nt it beginning to seem like an old B&W Haunted House movie with each scene getting more and more horrible for our protagonist. Waiting for the surprise ending?

      • I’m begging to think that Gibbs, Steele, Hansmeier, et. al. ran to Wal-Mart and bought a bunch of Monopoly sets to pull out the Get Out Of Jail Free cards and somehow think they’re protected.

        Or they have some trick up their sleeve. But the monopoly option seems most likely given their juvenile filings.

  28. So what happens when the trolls start punishing the does who filed motions to quash in cases by suing them in federal court? is it just another attempt to get info or are they seriously going to try a case in federal court?

    • Not much will happen for the Does who are singled out: it is not about them, these cases are not winnable on merits (or the lack thereof to be precise). I would like to hear from the victims ASAP: it’s not a solitaire game, and no matter what Steele is thinking, such lawsuits can and and will be his perilous moves.

      • @SJD Hey I know I’ve asked this question before and I don’t think anyone has giving me an answer so I just wanna know the Comcast case is accusing people of hacking right? And they wanna get names so they can harass and try to get free $$ and that will be the end of it with Comcast or what are they trying to do with Comcast exactly ?

        • Please read the documents in the page and the comments. Everything is explained in there. Please also read the FAQs. The whole scam is explained in detail there.

        • They’re using the CFAA statute to say that they did hack. Yes. None of these cases has gone far enough to know exactly what it is they are accusing people of. It’s been suggested its just a “torrent case in disguise.” Or it could be the password hacking/sharing.

          They sued comcast because comcast refused to hand over the names. Comcast is fighting the subpoenas. They don’t want to be bothered finding all that information. It costs them time and money. So they decided to fight back.

          If comcast loses, and if the motions to quash lose, then yes, Prenda gets your contact info. And then the harassment starts.

          And sometimes if you fight back they get pissy and name you in a federal case but then do nothing. I’m not really sure what the federal cases are. CFAA is a state issue, I think. That part confuses me. Though some Guava cases that have been filed in Federal court cite the CFAA and some sight and are filed as copyright infringement. Yet they all still use hacking and bittorrent in all of the briefs as if they forgot to use find and replace properly.

          The Guava, LWSystems and Oaxaca cases are all a shoot off of the Lightspeed cases in southern illinois. Read about that from the drop down menu. And all of the state cases have the defense attorney Adam Urbancyzk. And they all have agreed orders for the subpoenas. Which is why no one trusts AU.

          That’s it in a nutshell. The information is on the site and you’ll be able to find more by looking at all the posts from SJD and Raul from the drop down menu.

        • Re the conusion about state vs federal and cfaa vs copyright, I dont think prenda gives a crap if their complaints make sense in the courts they’re filed in since they don’t actually plan on trying thm. I’m also convinced they don’t even reed the compaints before they go out the door. I remeber at least one case where they argued up and down that it wasn’t a copyright case, but the complaint was very obviously a blatant copyight claim.

    • Usually nothing. A judge in Ohio sua sponte killed the case because they geolocated the IP address and found it wasn’t in the right district. Two (I think) cases got killed off for failure to prosecute. One in MAD (I think) is being defended by Booth and Sweet and they are kicking the crap out of Prenda there. I believe counter-claims were also filed so the case cannot be dismissed by Prenda.

      And there are other ones where not much of anything is happening. Most of the action is in the state courts where Prenda can get away with a lot more.

      If any of my info is wrong, hopefully those with better retention will correct me.

  29. If Gibbs does indeed get thrown under the bus by Steele et. al., what effect, if any, will that have at all on Prenda/AntiPiracyLawGroup?

    Will other defendants be able to cite the outcome of the hearing or is it something that is inadmissible?

  30. If Gibbs does get thrown under the bus, what effects will there be, if any, on Steele et. al.?

    Will defendants be able to use the outcome of the hearings against them in other jurisdictions? Or are these things inadmissible?

    • If Steele throws Gibbs under the bus, Gibbs will squeal and he knows A LOT more than most other Prenda “attorneys.” He can easily, and I mean VERY easily make Steele & Co.’s life a living hell. Below is my dream scenario of how this would play out :P

      As I’ve said before, I want to see all of those asshats put in one room, sat down at a table, the U.S. Attorney for the district (or a Deputy A.G. would be even better) walks in with one pen and one “get out of jail free” plea agreement containing immunity for testifying against Steele et. al. but doesn’t say a word about it at the time. The U.S. Attorney lays the plea agreement upside down in the middle of the table with the pen on top, goes back into the observation room, gets on the intercom and says “In front of you is a plea agreement containing immunity from prosecution under Title 18, Part I, Chapter 96 of the United States Code, also known as Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations or ‘RICO’ for short, with regard to any of the crimes committed in the past that fall under the RICO statute. If you really piss me off, and by ‘you’ I mean Mr. Steele, I may just convene a grand jury and have each of you indicted on the individual federal charges that fall under the RICO statute and are applicable to this case so you’re being charged for the same offense twice. I’d suggest keeping your damn mouth shut for now, Mr. Steele. The first person to sign that piece of paper gets to walk out of here a free man and we will never bother you again as long as you do not perjure yourself. The rest of you will be remanded into federal custody by the U.S. Marshals to await trial. Just remember, we’ve thoroughly investigated what you’ve done and as attorneys, albeit incompetent ones, know that joinder is proper in this case, your cases will not be severed, and I’m sure the USP Marion will be a great place to live for the next 20 years. Now, let’s get down to business…don’t touch the agreement until I say go….NOWWW…GO!” Watch that shit turn into Thunderdome. It’d be like when the UFC first started or a gladiator match. The U.S. Attorney then laughs his ass off for a minute or two, then sends people in to break up the brawl.

      Not sure what do you mean about defendants using outcome of hearings against them in different jurisdictions. You mean a guy in California who’s being sued in Cook County? It’s a general rule of thumb that federal district court judges (and appellate panels) will cite in their rulings the rulings from other jurisdictions, even though they are not binding. It’s also a general rule of thumb that federal judges consider opinions and rulings issued by state judges if the matter occurs within the jurisdiction of a specific state or apply state rules of civil procedure even though the case is federal (such as Nick Ranallo’s successful motion to post undertaking under Sec. 1030 of California Code of Civil Procedure in AFH v. Trinh…AF Holdings is broke, can’t pay it, I’m stumped). State judges can and do use opinions and rulings issued by federal judges when making rulings and drafting opinions w/ regard to a state-specific case.

      The only truly binding decision would be a ruling handed down by either a federal circuit court of appeals for the specific circuit where the action is occurring/occurred or a Supreme Court ruling which would be universally binding.

      Hope I answered your question heh. If not, I hope you at least learned something new :)

      (Boilerplate Disclaimer: None of the above is to be construed as legal advice as it is solely for the purpose of discussion.)

      • Yeah, you did, thanks.

        Essentially, I’m afraid that if they do throw Gibbs under the bus and Gibbs doesn’t rat everyone out, then all this will be for naught, since it seems like the courts in CA are the only ones pushing for the answers at the moment.

        But its good to know that whatever happens can be used in other proceedings and Gibbs’ actions can be used to illustrate Prenda’s practices in other jurisdictions.

        • They have plenty of other people who will when facing a maximum of 20 years in federal prison and that’s just the RICO statute sentencing guidelines. If the prosecuting US Attorney isn’t feeling generous and I can’t see why he/she would considering Steele & Co. have been fucking people over for most of the current decade and bragging about it, he/she could charge each of them with an ASSLOAD of counts of wire fraud, extortion, and I’m sure I could think of several more off the RICO list if I weren’t all wonky right now. Theoretically, they could all get de facto life if sentences are applied consecutively. Those idiots better hope that they get a truly impartial judge because it’ll likely go down in ILND where Steele first cut his teeth and where Prenda operates out of so all of the judges know what Prenda is really up to. Combine that with a pissed off US Attorney and you get a trainwreck for them and what would amount to a free yet priceless show for us.

    • If you go to the article SJD wrote about Gibbs (the most recent one) and read the comments section I believe the 89 year old defender postulated what could happen should Gibbs be sanctioned.

  31. I’ve got another really stupid question.

    How is Guava LLC, now apparently a real company licensed in California, the one initiating these cases, filing official documents and pleadings, sending demand letters promising relief from prosecution, and yet, still the plaintiff?

    This just seems odd to me.

      • Oh, that was supposed to be sarcasm to what was in the demand letter.

        But looking at it again, I realize that the “Licensed only in the state of California” was part of Gibbs’ signature.

        • And reading that carefully again, I guess it answered my question. Apparently, Gibbs is a lawyer only licensed in California, but is an in-house counsel to a corporation that’s letterhead places it in D.C. Who now initiates lawsuits, settlements and legal action to protect their purveyance of porn.

          I’m not sure why I keep insisting that any of this has to make sense. I keep forgetting that we’re dealing with the lower end of the spectrum of humanity.

  32. It was supposed to be a snide remark to the line in what actually was Gibbs’ signature. I thought it was something else.

    That’ll teach me to scroll too fast.

  33. The most recent attached demand letter Gibb’s signature looks clearly like a stamped signature. Probably not any significance to it, as they forge/take liberty with signatures all the time.

    • Who wants to bet that Gibbs has NO IDEA that he’s been “promoted” to “In-House Counsel” for Guava, LLC? I’d like to bet that he has no fuckin idea but he will soon. Steele has (allegedly) shown his propensity for signature forgery so I’m sure that forging one of his lackey’s signatures isn’t even illegal or unethical in his twisted mind. Likely this was done for a reason and knowing how slimy and slithery Steele is, it’s probably got something to do with how Judge Wright is gonna wreck Gibbs and leave him bawling his eyes out while in the fetal position on the courtroom floor.

      That and how in the hell can you be “In-House Counsel” for a business that has no “house” or even corporate charter, but instead has a mailing address at what’s likely a UPS Store.

  34. Isn’t it kinda odd how in the new Guava herassment letters they don’t even mention what people stole or shared lol don’t they have to name such its like basically saying hey we think you committed a crime cause we have your info so give us 4K and we won’t bother you.Anyone else have anything to say about that?
    Don’t they have to name something ?
    Guessing by the community seeing this letter do you guys think they’re safe to ignore?

    • Been almost 2 weeks haven’t got any harassment calls but that cause we changed or number a long time ago and no more herassment letters would think if they couldn’t reach me through phone they would send another letter immediately I’m I wrong?

    • Generally, nothing.

      But its up to you. You can continue to ignore them. Or you can give them the Richard Prior Response.

      Other than giving the RPR, if you decide to do that, you should not talk to them.

      • Thanks I was going to give them the RPR,next time they call. I have one question. How can i be in trouble for something i did not originally steal? Even if it was or was not shared via my ip address. It does not seem to add up.

        • They don’t care if you did it or not. They have no proof connecting you to it other than your IP address (which is not proof), and they have no intention of proving you did, seeing as they have not once tried any of these cases on merits. They want you to be embarrassed and/or scared of having to deal with this and possibly (less than 1% chance) being name and publicly connected to watching porn. They leverage this fear by saying that $3000-4000 is worth it to make them go away. Enough people fall for it, so they keep doing it.

          Block their numbers or screen your calls, and move on with your life. At least that’s what I’m doing.

  35. Rfcexpress finally updated correctly. Guava now has 29 federal lawsuits. 11 were filed this month. The states are ILND, CARD, MI, and NYSD.

    I recap’d (will be available soon) the ILND and the NYSD cases. The complaints are cleaned up slightly. There is no mention of copyright or infringement.

    They also “tightened” up their claim of civil conspiracy:

    Each time Defendant used a shared and hacked password and username, he reached an agreement with another co-conspirator(s) within the hacking community whereby the member provided the username and password in order to allow the Defendant to unlawfully access and obtain protected information from Plaintiff’s websites.

    And they now actually point to a specific clause of the CFAA, which they hadn’t before to my knowledge:
    A private right of action exists under the Act under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(g).

    They also claim a damaged reputation:

    Plaintiff has been damaged due to the Defendant’s fraud and abuse of Plaintiff’s computer systems in excess of $250,000. The damage to Plaintiff includes, but is not limited to, 1) harm to its business reputation by having its client and customer information accessed by unauthorized individuals, and 2) impairment to Plaintiff’s computer systems made by changes to the systems caused by Defendant and his hacking program.

    The two complaints I got were both signed by Duffy.

    What is interesting is this part:

    Defendant obtained a username and password from a website that allows its members to trade stolen

    Because before I believe they made inference to people hacking into it and creating false user/pass combinations. It seems like right now they’re just saying it was outright theft/sharing of user/pass. They also admit, finally, that the websites are adult oriented.

    So, as of right now, their major claims are using “hacked” passwords. Which could have been shared. Or the link masked. Sounds pretty weak still…

    • There are six federal Guava LLC v Doe cases filed in MND on 2/6 and 2/7. Not sure if you counted those.

    • I’m still a little confused about who/what they are accusing. Are they now saying that all the defendant did was to have an account on a message board where someone posted a compromised username and password? How are they going to apply the CFAA statute if the breach could be stopped by simply disabling the login? There is hardly $5k of damage there. Also, I don’t understand the relationship of the co-conspirators. What is the difference between them and the defendant? It sounds like the only common connection between them is that they all used the same compromised login. They’re not really try to argue that there was some kind of communication or connection between them?

      Also, this move makes me wonder if these are another case where they got someone to somehow admit that they got a password from a particular site and they made a deal to make them the defendant in these cases….

      • Yeah, they are claiming communication…by crazy psycho super radiation mind control!

        “Each time Defendant used a shared and hacked password and username, he reached an agreement with another co-conspirator(s) within the hacking community whereby the member provided the username and password in order to allow the Defendant to unlawfully access and obtain protected information from Plaintiff’s websites.”

        • So here’s a question… if they are now claiming that the defendant got the login/password from a internet message board, how do they know which one? All they have is an IP address in a web log. They have no way of knowing where you got the password. Unless of course they leaked it themselves!

    • So what i get from this is that with any old valid username and password, you’d have access to 250k worth of a combination of valuable customer and client info and access to major system components that could damage their site? Sounds like a horrible business model, really crappy programming, or they’re pulling numbers out of their assses…mot likely a combination of all of the above.

      Also, do they actually list what site they operate?

  36. The docket for the ILND case is here: . There are three defendants listed on that docket.

    Interestingly enough, Guava prays for “Judgment against Defendant’s co-conspirators aided him/her in committing computer fraud and abuse against Plaintiff pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1030(g);”

    Since this is a case against a John Doe, it might be likely that Guava has turned to the Federal courts with their “new and improved” complaints. It might be possible that this is an attempt to harvest IPs in federal jurisdictions due to some of the delays in state courts. Or it could be obfuscation. Those more knowledgeable than me could probably comment.

    Also, the letters are still signed by the Anti-Piracy Law Group.

    • So wait are these unknown does in which they are trying to get the names for? or they already know who the does are and are coming after them?

      • Since they’re listed as Does in the lawsuit and identified by IP address, I’m assuming that they’re unknown and this is a harvesting attempt. But I’m not positive.

    • They got the IPs from another case and are now suing yet again, they know damn well who it is. The Doe probably told them to fuck themselves in one of the other mass Doe Guava cases. Steele, err, “The Bull” has filed suits against people who’ve dared him to sue them individually (a member of the clergy at a church in one of the thousand Chicago suburbs if I recall correctly and that’s just one of many) or told him to go to hell…or some derivation of that.

      • Yeah, that’s one of the things I was actually just thinking about. Think about what Prenda gets to do. File the case. Serve subpoena to ISP. Get response. Send letters. Make phone calls. Make more phone calls. Send more letters.

        It’s a whole other year for Prenda to keep harassing the same people. And this time its a federal suit. That might get your name on it.

        Just another way to pressure people into settling.

Comments are closed.