“Guava” and “Arte de Oaxaca” scams hit Cook County court

Guava v. Skyler Case

As I blogged two posts below, I was on vacation in a place where forests smell like ripe guava. I am not making it up and have plenty of pictures of the trees covered with yellow and red fruit. It is a smell of a paradise. However, the Guava that is getting rotten in the Cook County court (Illinois) stinks badly. I am talking about the most fraudulent case in Prenda’s history, Guava v. Skyler Case, which was ill-conceived on 6/29/2012.

The page dedicated to the Guava case is the most visited as of lately. You will find a brief description drafted by Raul and links to the relevant documents there. The page traffic and the number of comments back Raul’s guess that the number of “co-conspirators” is staggering. I encourage you to read the comments to understand the unprecedented extent of Prenda’s arrogance and bad faith.

It is widely suspected that Guava is no one else than Lighspeed Media Corporation, a company of a disgraced pornographer Steve Jones, whose market niche is underage-looking girls. He drew our attention this year after conspiring with John Steele to run a giant scam in the corrupt St. Clair county of Illinois with the help from a corrupt judge. We covered this case a lot: here is the page dedicated to it; follow the links to numerous posts from there. Currently this case is removed to the federal court and is about to collapse: crooks had audacity to add AT&T and Comcast as defendants, thus summoning the best lawyers in the industry to represent the defendants with bottomless pockets. Also, one of the best anti-troll lawyers, Booth Sweet, represents the main defendant in this case. Before Steele started chasing trouble by suing big guys, I did not know that he, in addition to his numerous “virtues,” is also a masochist.

Some things have happened on the Guava case since defendant’s attorney Adam Urbanczyk and Paul Duffy signed a brow-rising agreed order to allow subpoenas to be sent to the huge list of ISPs: attorney Erin Russell filed numerous motions to quash, which prompted the spillage of plaintiff counsel’s poisonous saliva. Ad hominem-laden plaintiff’s response is hard to read without the blood boiling sensation, yet it is rather good news: Erin seemingly hit the nerve, and the trolls are visibly angry. Paul Duffy signed this document, but I doubt he wrote it: you can sense the arrogance and insecurity of John Steele between the lines. In addition, you can compare the styles of this response and the complaint: they are obviously written by different people.

It is also necessary to mention that the judge on this case, Sanjay T Tailor, happened to be a technology savvy relatively young man, who took his time to look into this case, and he sensed the fraud: all the doubts about it were dissolved today.

9/25/2012 hearing

Today’s status hearing was very encouraging. Judge Tailor looked angry. Master Troll John Steele flew to Chicago in the midst of his hasty fleeing from Florida to Nevada (leaving formerly loyal but unmovable Mark Lutz behind). This unusual appearance clearly tells us that trolls are panicking, and Steele, who, unlike a bone-in-the-tongue Duffy, is capable of lying to judges in a smooth way, attempted to salvage the situation.

Judge started the status hearing by asking attorneys for plaintiff and defendant: “Are you in bed with each other?” Hope you did not spill your beverages. Everyone was shocked, and it all went downhill (for trolls) from there. Steele tried to preach some usual bullshit, but the judge was not amused. Judge Tailor was not convinced by the twisted logic that the so-called co-conspirators do not have standing despite the fact that they are accused of the same “crime” as the mysterious defendant, and are contacted with monetary demands. The hearing on motions (mostly Erin Russell’s clients) is set to the end of November, and undoubtedly the subpoenas will be quashed at least for those who reside outside of Illinois. I hope that the judge will not stop at that and will kill the case — banning crooks from utilizing the personal information of “co-conspirators” they already obtained from the ISPs. Moreover, I hope that Attorney General and/or federal investigators will pick up the baton from the judge.

Erin Russell was also at that hearing, and if I missed anything important, I hope she will comment below.

A carbon copy case: Arte de Oaxaca v. Mullen

A couple of days ago another frivolous case, Arte de Oaxaca v. Mullen, No. 12-L-9036, which is a carbon copy of the Guava case, was discovered in the Cook County docket. This case also has a single defendant (Stacey Mullen — is she a real person?) and an unknown number of co-conspirators (which is undoubtedly huge). The defendant is represented by Adam Urbanczyk (surprise!), and… there is another agreed order to allow discovery, signed by both Duffy and Urbaczyk, which is filed two business days (8/14/2012) after the complaint (8/10/2012), and prior to a formal defendant’s answer to allegations, which is still not filed. I am not even discussing the obvious: that this case does not belong to the county level and should have been immediately removed to the federal court.

It is indeed a carbon copy: sloppy Steele & Duffy did not even proofread their pleadings, leaving “Skyler Case” in the “Prayer of Relief” section, which technically makes the entire complaint invalid.

Note that the judge on this case introduced some safeguards, which is encouraging:

We gave a lot of benefit of doubt to EFF-listed Adam Urbanczyk, but our patience is running thin, and if even the judge suspects collusion and does not hesitate to openly talk about it, we cannot pretend anymore that Adam plays a fair game and his actions can be somehow excused. He is welcome to comment here, and if he can answer our questions and explain his actions in a way that proves his good faith, I see no problem in apologizing, but I doubt such a miracle will happen. All this is really sad: Adam is very young and this ordeal won’t reflect positively on his future career, especially if this scam is investigated by the authorities.


Since I used words farce, fraud, frivolous describing much less brazen abuses of the court system by copyright trolls, I ran out of epithets. I cannot find proper words that describe this garbage. And it will get even worse: we will for sure witness more fraud if Prenda criminals are not deterred ASAP. What can you do? First and foremost, do not settle. It is unnecessary and only fuels the extortion machine. There are few situations when one simply cannot afford that his or her name is dragged through dirt, but most people pay out of irrational fear and the lack of research. If you have money to spend, better spend it on a trusted attorney. And, of course, complain, complain, complain: to the media, FBI, Attorneys General, Bar associations. One voice can be ignored, ten voices can be ignored, but hundreds and thousands? I do not think so.

Update: 10/04/2012 hearing

All subpoenas are stayed.

Today’s hearing brought no surprises: judge Tailor was still not convinced that the case is adversarial in nature and refused to buy any conspiracy claims. John Steele was sweating and throwing tantrums in the courtroom, which he continued doing on Twitter (check his childish vindictive rants today): Illinois Bar Association apparently still thinks that Steele’s behavior is a model of professional conduct for others to follow. #facepalm

But I digress. The hearing has resulted in the following sua sponte (!) order (I decrypted clerk’s handwriting below):

This matter coming before this court on non-party’s emergency TRO, and the parties agreeing to the non-parties requests to inform non parties ISP to withhold the information, the Court orders, in addition, the following:

  1. Outstanding subpoenas not yet complied with by Internet Service Providers are stayed with further order of this Court.
  2. The plaintiff shall not issue any further subpoenas until further order of this Court.
  3. Plaintiff has until Oct 12 to file its answer to the various matters filed by attorney Russell. Attorney Russell shall file and reply by Oct 19.
  4. The hearing regarding all matters pending before the court, including petitioners as yet filed motion to review subpoena compliance by third party ISPs. Oct 26, 2012 at 10:30 am
  5. Nov 27, 2012 date is stricken.
  6. Counsel for plaintiff is ordered to notify all subpoenaed Internet Service Providers immediately of the entry of this order immediately by email, send a hard copy by regular mail and attempt to contact by said ISPs by telephone.

Any doubts that this turd of a case is essentially killed? Once again, it was a sua sponte order: judge Tailor didn’t issue the order because anybody asked him to do it, it was totally his idea. He said that he has started getting letters addressed to him in chambers from John Does and felt he needed to put a stop to that.



Relevant pages

  • All the documents from the state “hacking,” allegedly collusive cases are located on this page. A discussion is going on there as well.
wordpress counter


283 responses to ‘“Guava” and “Arte de Oaxaca” scams hit Cook County court

  1. Any updates on the Arte de Oaxaca v. Mullen case? I just got my Subpoena yesterday and am trying to get in contact with a lawyer to see what I should do. From what I hear, ignoring the hell out of these guys is the best option. Is this true?

  2. I’m pretty sure, at least on background, everything relating to Guava applies to Oaxaca. And Lightspeed too.

    I know SJD is working on a post for Guava coming up, and I’m sure it will give you more background on what’s going on. Like Guava/Oaxaca=Lightspeed.

  3. I am following Oaxaca. You can see court documents here

    Recently, they went to court and made ‘Answer and response’ (I am far from being an attorney so I am sure it is called something else) and ‘ Request for discovery’. The Plaintiff has 28 days to respond so that should take us to the first week of Dec. At that point, we will know a WHOLE LOT considering the items they asked for.

    By the way, this Doe received the first of what I am sure will be many letters asking for 4K. You would think that if they wanted someone to fork up 4k, they would at least tell them EXACTLY what they supposedly did.

    • I have not gotten a blackmail letter. I got a notice from my ISP telling me that they will release my information in 30 days. So they don’t have my personal info yet. Should I get a lawyer and motion to quash the subpoena? Should I be worried?

      • I can’t say what you should do. I contacted a lawyer who basically said, “Well, you could pay me 1800.00 to file a motion which could work but if it doesn’t, Steele and his guys could decide to release you from this case and take you to Federal Court. Second option would be to settle which would cost about 1800.00 or you could wait it out and see what happens.”

        From what I heard from the attorney that I spoke to, this judge in the Oaxaca case isn’t as informed as the Guava judge. Everyone I know tells me that I should go to my state attorney general.

        Without giving advice, if it were me (and it is) I would be sure to do lots of research if you are able, watch for new updates on the case regularly, and it never hurts to get a brief consultation regarding your options with an attorney. Just be careful on which attorneys you call. I certainly would never contact an attorney listed on that subpeona.

        • If you dont mind me asking, which attorney did you contact? Also, if I ignore the subpoena, what are the chances they will track me down and try to file against me directly? Bear in mind that I do not live in the state in which the class action was filed.

        • From what I can see by others posting, the chances of them going after me specifically are slim to non since the jurisdiction is wrong and they would have to file a motion in my district. So, I’m really not too worried since it seems like the Guava case is going nowhere and this one should too.

          • I spoke to Erin Russell and I should make note that she actually said, “if I file a motion, my rate is pretty close to what they would ask you to settle for and that is usually around 1800.00”

            I have the same conclusion you do. This case however does seem to be moving a bit quicker. I look forward to having more information once discovery has been provided. You should click on the link I provided and read the request. I thought it was pretty good!

          • Here is the document,%20written%20disc%20requests.pdf

            From what I understand, this is a process of Stacey Mullen having to give answers to the allegations. Then she being the defendant has the opportunity to request Discovery. This is telling the attorneys that they need to show proof in detail of what she is accused of why she is accused of it. For instance, if she is being sued for “hacking”, specifically what did she hack? What is the IP address and the specific files that were hacked. Read the document it is great.

          • Like I said, I am not even close to being an attorney so you probably want to ask one. They usually don’t charge for a brief consultation. I believe that if you settle prior to your ISP providing your information, then you remain “Doe…IP Address” In order to do this, you would need to hire an attorney to take care of that. No matter what, do not contact the Lawyers for the Plaintiff directly!

          • No bad consequences to settling. Money stays where it belongs — in your pocket, and society in general benefits: trolls suddenly become ashamed of their deeds and stop inflicting harm to the society on the spot.

        • Thank you for your advice SJD. I guess I would like to know what my chances of being picked out and named as a defendant. I can take empty threats in letters and being harassed on the phone. But I don’t have the money to defend myself in court. Especially for something I didnt do.

      • Well, making this disappear and not letting the plaintiff know who you are for under $2000 seems like a good deal to me. Can you get me Erin Russells information? don’t even know how my ISP has sent me a subpoena. I didn’t do any hacking! This is absurd. I’ve never been in trouble with the law and I have to admit, I’m scared that my name might be soiled for no reason!

        • You can google Erin. I didn’t hack either and I don’t use Bittorrent or any other software. Unfortunately, I wouldn’t have 2000 bucks even if I did want to lay down and get suckered. When I first got the subpoena, I freaked out when I got my subpoena too but I researched and calmed down a bit. Plus, you can’t suck blood from a turnip. I guess I will just get multiple letters and cross my fingers that the case gets dismissed.

          I should mention. That the Univ. of Washington got contacted by their ISP for the same reason. The IP that was referenced happened to belong to a printer. Don’t believe me? Once again, Google….

        • SJD. I understand that settling is not ideal as it encourages this kind of crap, but it is scary for some of us who are not as informed as you.

          Do you think it is best to ignore subpoenas and just fly under the radar? What are the chances this case is dismissed?

          • In this case — much more than in any bittorent one. Tell me: what is the worst case scenario will be if you don’t pay?

        • This is nuts, when did you get your subpoena? Your ISP seems to have given your information away quickly if you are already getting those blackmail letters

          • My letter is dated Oct. 16. I will point out that I did not receive a subpoena, My ISP did. The letter from my ISP was informing me that they were subpoenaed for my information and would release it within 3 weeks unless I contacted them saying I was going to act.

            If I were subpoenaed, I think that would mean they were coming after me and would name me as a defendant. At least that is what I gather. Right now, they pretty much are just getting their list of names so they can start sending their phishing letters and Robocalls. I did notice on this case though that the ISP’s were only required to give our Name and Addresses and not Phone Numbers. I am crossing my fingers that we won’t have to start listening to those!

        • SDJ, I am not sure what the worst they can do is. I do not live in the district that the suit was filed. Does that help?

          I do not have much money, I am pretty young, which is why I worry about being dragged into federal court or something and going bankrupt.

          • OK, a good start.

            Possibility of being dragged into the federal court. First of all, the probability of this event is less than 1% and, if the rumors I can’t talk about at this time turn out to be true, than 0 (zero). All the individual cases are bittorent ones except a handful of Guava cases that are the result of Steele’s drunken vitriol. These cases 10 times weaker that bittorent ones, even Beryl Howell was not impressed. The sole purpose of these cases is to vindicate one particular attorney, who (solely in Steele’s mind) derailed the lucrative Cook County court extortion undertakings. If (big IF) there will be a second batch of these CFAA county court-derivative cases, by that time the original batch will progress to the point when all their flaws are painfully obvious.

            Next, to be financially ruined you must either retain very expensive attorney or lose the case. I can’t see how the latter is possible, so all the talk about the “financial devastation” boils down to the cost of defense. Although I recommend hiring a lawyer if you are named individually (and especially served, which is not always the case), it is not a rocket science to copy someone’s Answer in case you absolutely have no money for a lawyer (keep in mind that the likelihood of recouping the fees is substantial) to avoid a default judgment.

            I cannot and will not tell people what to do. There are some circumstances when a simple allegation, no matter how untruthful it is, can ruin your career or family, and that 100% justifies settling, no matter how we all hate to feed the trolls. In all other cases, I only ask not to act hastily. Deadlines are myth: if you are resolved to settle, you can do it for the fraction of the original cost later on. There are lot of stories when demands are actually reduced after “deadlines.”

  4. Thank you for your advice SJD. I guess I would like to know what my chances of being picked out and named as a defendant. I can take empty threats in letters and being harassed on the phone. But I don’t have the money to defend myself in court. Especially for something I didn’t do.

    • As I said (and not only me), about 1%, maybe less: the fate of current federal Guava cases will bring critical information.

      And some bigger events may be on the way that, I hope, will prove my intuition’s prediction that Prenda’s campaign of a shitload of “individual suits” is the last bluff.

      • In that case, I will wait this one out. I’m not about to settle this for something I did not do.
        I did not directly receive a subpoena, my ISP did. So they will eventually release my information to the trolls. I guess I will just have to have my trash bin ready for the onslaught of blackmail letters I am going to get.

        I know you aren’t an attorney or anything, SJD, but do you know how much it might cost to hire a lawyer so that I don’t have to deal with them calling and threatening me every other day?

  5. I received my extortion letter in the mail today. They are asking for $4000. They aren’t getting it, but they are asking for it.

  6. Any updates on the Guava case (I don’t understand the legal-ese of the court docket)? If Judge Tailor dismisses this case, can Prenda still come after me personally? Any guesses how long this case might get drawn out?

    Sorry for the all the questions: this stuff is kind of freaking me out.

  7. the cfaa complaint used by guava has a 2 year statute of limitations from time of detection (so the date they put with your IP in the complaint)

  8. There are like 6-12 individual Guava lawsuits pending nationwide (assuming there are state and difficult to track). The complaint is crap, a first year law student could rip it apart. So look at the percentages, 6500 Does and lets say 10 named in filed lawsuits or a 1 in 650 chance. Good odds for Does IMO, worry more about an anvil landing on your noggin.

  9. Recieved my letter from my ISP last week naming me as a “co-conspirator” in the Oaxaca case. Have been in contact with Ms. Russell about best plan of attack, but after reading through a lot of these posts, I’m still on the fence about exactly what the best way to handle this is. My ISP’s representation is dragging their feet in response to the subpeona as they HATE these individuals and are tired of them harrassing their customers. My notice says I have until December 17th to file a motion to quash or they will be releasing my information to the defense. From what I’m gathering, it’s best to just keep my head down and ignore all of this. I guess my question is: should I honestly be worried about them coming after me in my own jurisdiction, as I do not live in Cook County, let alone the state of Illinois. I honestly don’t feel like paying money I, quite frankly, don’t have nor do I enjoy the thought of paying for something I am not guilty of.

  10. I received a letter last week about my ISP being subpoenaed relating to this case. I suppose I’m going to let them name me since I can’t afford a letter to quash since that doesn’t even guarantee me getting off. Does anyone have any updates on this case? I’m pretty stresses about it and not sure what else to do.

    • Relax. No one is going to name you. This case is a farce. Read around (including comments) and get calmed down. It’s like being a victim of an attempted robbery. Very stressful, regardless of the facts 1) that the robber fled cursing and promising to get you later; 2) you learned that the only weapon he had is a plastic spoon. Once your heartbeat returns to normal pulse, you’ll convert from scared to pissed off.

      • Thank you for the reply. This site is definitely helping me calm down and seeing how many others there are out there that this has happened to. I can not find anything new about this case and the last comment was a month ago, which made me curious if there was any updates. Won’t they begin to send “Settlement letters” soon? What should I do with them?

        • The general consensus is to wipe your ass with the settlements. But in all seriousness, just file them away and ignore them. If you want, I’m sure SJD would like to have a copy e-mailed because she keeps track of them. And laugh at how the letters usually make no sense. Citing a CFAA claim but saying you violated copyright, etc.

          So yeah, just ignore them and file them away just in case.

          And there is a hearing tomorrow, I think, for the guava case that’s already under way so I’m sure someone will update with info on that afterwards and you can find out even more about the wacky nature of this case.

        • This blog has a ton of info going back to the original incarnation as Ligjtspeed Media Corp.My advice: read up, get informed, join the discussion.

        • I got my big bad scary letter last November. I set it in a big pile of papers that I am sure I can fine if I need them. I haven’t gotten another but honestly, John and his guys have been a bit busy these days fighting to keep their butts out of Federal Prison.

  11. I have been reading this site daily since I received the letter from my ISP. If i do receive a settlement letter in the mail, what does it look like and is there a return address on the envelope?

  12. SJD, first off thanks for your efforts in promoting awareness. I just recently received my ISP letter regarding the Oaxaca case and the usual “welcome” packet with a deadline we have all received. After spending much time on this site, I do see the benefits in ignoring the trolls and waiting it out. Although one of your earlier posts on this thread concerns me a bit, I hope you dont mind me cutting and pasting your words but here is a quote from one of your former posts.

    “There are some circumstances when a simple allegation, no matter how untruthful it is, can ruin your career or family, and that 100% justifies settling, no matter how we all hate to feed the trolls.”

    I can tolerate avoiding the trolls, but this bit you wrote about effecting careers or family is a bit alarming to me, would you be able to elaborate a bit more on this? Thanks!

    • Maybe I can elaborate a bit. I received my extortion, I mean, settlement letter last November. I ignored it.

      My job relies on reputation and trust. If they wanted to, they could start calling family members and work. This would lower the amount of trust and reduce my reputation. That would adversely affect my career and family life. Of course, if they DID do that I would be seeking counsel about slander. Since I didn’t have an operable computer at the time of the supposed infringement, I mean hacking, I mean.. what are they trying to sue for? I don’t even know. The letters are weak and lacking in facts.

      Don’t worry too much about them. If you KNOW you didn’t do it and can prove it (not that difficult), the whole case is full of wild imaginings and Steele’s dreams for more money.

    • there are some careers that would be effected negatively if you are NAMED in a porn related case wether you win or lose. (the nice thing about guava and arte is that they don’t actually refference porn anywhere thus making them even less scary) if you are a minister/pastor, school teacher, or some other morally viewed field then yes the mere alligation/association with porn can effect your life negatively, but only if you are specifically called out, which at this point with guava and arte and lightspeed will not happen(i say this with 99.999% certanty).

    • Urbanczyk twitted today:

      #Guava, electronic eavesdropper in court for case status hearing admonished by Judge Tailor, chased by bailiffs, apprehended / searched #wow

      So yes, something interesting did happen 🙂

      • it was stupid old me 😦 the most embarrassing fact i did not even record. reading twitter pointing phone at judge. i did make a couple of Duffy pictures though BEFORE the hearing started. policemen went through my phone, made me delete pictures and let go. scared me to death. next tim ill leave the phone home.

        judge stayed the discovery again and said that he wanted to see the deposition transcripts. both AU and Duffy promised in 2 weeks. judge reiterated that he is suspicious about this case. the entire hearing took 5 minute. oh, and Duffy was an hout late.

        • yea i remember seeing something about how it will become a criminal offense to bring any type of recording device (phone, camera, usb drive) into the cook county court house. apparently it went into effect a monthish ago but they have extended the grace period because it is so rediculous that people didn’t think it was true. welcome to illinois…..

        • Did Tailor ask Duffy and A U if they’re “in bed” together…again? He’s got a damn good reason to be suspicious. Two A U cases, both are federal issues, could be easily removed to ILND, where judges who actually know what the hell is going on would be able to adequately address them, push them through based on their merits (as in there are none), and summarily curb stomp both. But no, kept it in Cook County and that alone smells like shit. Add in the agreed upon orders, I’m convinced something has gone down.

          • Literally – no. Virtually – yes. Because, according to one attorney I chatted about this case and this order, an order to provide deposition transcript is anything but ordinary. If Tailor presses this to the end (I hope he will), our crooks are screwed: they cannot simply dismiss the defendant now without raising suspicion. And if the judge issues an injunction and monetary relief, it can cause a srawman defendant revolt: “you promised me I will come off easily!”

      • The order is available on the AU’s website. I also copied it and linked from the Guava page.

        It’s only a one-line order (consistent with what Anonymous commenter reported earlier):

        Transcripts of both plaintiff’s and defendant’s depositions shall be provided to the court by Jan 30,2013

        Next hearing is set: Feb. 20, 2013 at 9:20 am

  13. Does everything that happens with Guava also apply for Oaxaca v Mullen? Or are these treated as two separated circumstances. Are both to be treated the same way as far as taking action or ignoring them?

    • No they’re two separate scams…err, cases. The two things they have in common are that Stee…FUCK I keep making these mistakes, I mean Duffy is counsel of record in both cases (of the Paul Duffy Group aka Prenda front) and that no one TRULY knows who owns Guava or Arte de Oaxaca but it’s suspected Guava = Lightspeed and possibly HDP. However, I’d discount HDP’s involvement after Paul Pilcher’s, ehm…problems with the Steven Yuen, Arizona’s Attorney General, and now the FBI.

  14. Hi all. Just an update about a call I just got today.
    I originally recieved the letter from my ISP saying they were served with a subpoena in July I believe, then early October, I got the obligitory “settlement offer” in the mail from Prenda along with a single phone call/voicemail left from Prenda around that same time.
    Now this evening, I got another call with a voicemail left, which I have typed out to share

    “This is Jeff Shultz over at Prenda law about a letter that our office mailed to you beginning of October, having to do with violations of computer fraud and abuse act, and our client Guava LLC. Their offer to settle expired months ago, and they just wanted us to give you a quick call before we do move forward and file a complaint with your name in it.
    I suppose 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”

    Should I be concerned that I will now be named and sued directly?
    Thanks for all the info!

    • I received the same call and voicemail last night. I have a feeling that it is a desparation move before this case gets thrown out of the court.

  15. Got my call on the Arte de Oaxaca case last night. His response when I said I would fight in court: “I’d like to see you fight.”

    Give me a frickin’ break. Is that supposed to scare me?

  16. Update on Oaxaca case: I’m an attorney representing someone who was one of about 100 IP addresses ID’d in a subpoena in the Oaxaca v. Mullen case. I filed a Motion to quash, as did another attorney. Duffy filed a somewhat lackluster response, and I filed a Reply brief. The whole thing is set for a ruling (not sure if judge will want oral argument) on March 20.

    • Thank you for the update, Mr. Johnson. If you find it appropriate to share any public filings with the community, we will definitely appreciate it. If you are not comfortable doing it for whatever reason, we understand.

      • Sure, I’ll email them to you. They’re in the public record after all. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts. I was only vaguely aware of the controversy before being retained, and your site was a good jumping off point for researching the topic.

        • Read your motion, thank you: someone had to bring up the collusion angle and notify the judge about the damning Merkel’s affidavit.

          And Duffy’s ghost writer’s argument that

          Illinois law strongly disfavors the use of fictitious names in judicial proceedings. At common law, suits involving fictitious parties were considered to be void ab initio.

          is mind boggling. Aren’t Arte de Oaxaca, Guava, LW Holdings all fictitious names? None of these “companies” exists both de facto and de juro.

  17. Apparently, the Arte de Oaxaca case has also been dismissed by agreement. This usually indicates that a settlement agreement has been reached. I am trying to obtain copy of the order to confirm.

    This is somewhat disappointing as I was looking forward to arguing it next week.

      • Yep, it is extremely disappointing: basically the goals of sham lawsuits (both Guava and Arte) were achieved, and now the entire swindle will disappear in time. (This is all my opinion: you know why i should make this disclaimer.)

      • Yet I don’t have the Guava v. Case dismissal order: would love to see one (as well as other missing documents, especially from the LWS v Hubbard). I have a tentative plan to write about all these allegedly collusive lawsuits, including one federal (AF Holdings v Ciccone) and call the “defense” out.

        • That would be nice. Need a copy for my file. I have received one phone call and two settlement letters on that case, and need to have the documentation in case they continue.

  18. Well, at least one goal was not accomplished: they never got identifying information from at least one subpoena. If I have time, I will try to get a copy of that order, but its probably not very interesting.

    • Hey before you two (SJD and Wesley Johnson) move onto other things.

      First many thanks to Mr. Johnson for the excellent MTQ in the Arte case, “nice work”.

      Second I doubt that I am the only Doe (I was on the cox subpoena) that is wondering how the final order affects us. This case was dismissed WITH prejudice. Does that only affect the defendant or does that affect the entire group.

  19. Thanks for the compliment, that’s always nice to hear. An order dismissing a case ends any obligation on the part of subpoena respondent to respond.

    With regard to the Oaxaca case, the authorizing order and at least the Cox subpoena had the wrong case number. Cox is aware of the issue, but If you are subject to a different subpoena and a different ISP, be sure to alert them about the case number discrepancy.

    • No I haven’t received any other subpoena’s – ‘thank god”. My question is more toward the with or without prejudice as it applies to the allegation or complaint. Does “with prejudice” technically preclude them from using this instance or Ip addresses in the future.

  20. I received a letter today and was just wondering if this was the typical style of the letters others are receiving. “Dear …. Our firm has been retained by Arte de Oaxaca to file a lawsuit against you. Your internet service provider ….., identified you as the Internet account holder who harmed our client. My client’s lawsuit will allege that you violated state and federal computer misuse statutes and will seek to hold you jointly and severally liable for the amount of damage you and your co-conspirators caused.” It goes on like that, gives you a faq section etc. Just wondering if there was any new news on this. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s