Guardaley | X-Art

Judge Lynn Hughes does not mince words

Remember TXSD Judge Lynn Hughes? I wrote about his amazing bench-slapping of Prenda’s sloppy minion Douglas McIntyre two years ago:

The court is not an ex-girlfriend’s Facebook wall. All documents must be filed with the court, captioned, signed by counsel, and with service certified.

Later I wrote about this judge calling out Prenda’s abuse, ordering the troll to destroy putative defendants’ personal data they already got from the ISPs:

First Time has abused its opportunity for discovery. It has insufficiently cooperated with the court and now wants to abandon its claims without explanation.

It may not use the information it has received; it must destroy it.

So, you get the idea: if you lie about your real motives, if you pretend to be interested in bringing the case all the way to the jury trial (while inventing excuses for delays and extensions), if you are generally a dirtbag, you really don’t want your case to be assigned to Lynn Hughes.

Yet the behaviors I just described are the exact modus operandi of copyright trolls! Thus, I bet that Keith Vogt, a Chicago-based sleazeball, who filed a champertous lawsuit Dallas Buyers Club v. Does 1-25 (TXSD 14-cv-02218) on 8/2/2014, is not happy to find out that he must face Hughes soon.

The judge doesn’t mince words: right after the case was assigned to him, he issued a short order outlining what our poor troll should expect. The service must be accomplished in 60 days, and the judge expects all the parties to appear for an initial pretrial conference on 11/3/2014 (I hope, Hughes will require personal attendance). Yet the most hilarious line is #8:

Failure to comply with this order may result in sanctions, including dismissal, and prolonged tirades by the court,

which I really hope will happen if Vogt is stupid enough not to run away at once.


Crystal Bay Corporation, seriously?

Vogt and his German employers don’t have any sense of reality. In his declaration (which is a sole basis of ex parte discovery), plaintiff’s purported expert, Guardaley’s Daniel Macek, claims that he works for Crystal Bay Corporation. In an ongoing troll disaster Elf-Man v Lamberson (WAED 13-cv-00395), defense attorney Chris Lynch thoroughly proved that this “corporation” is a pure fraud, a shelf entity created by a disbarred attorney in South Dakota. This fake corporation also “employs” Guardaley’s own incarnation of Alan Cooper’s ghost — Darren M. Griffin, a mysterious dude, whose existence is reasonably questioned.

The Troll Center knows about these developments, yet nonetheless an army of US parasitic lawyers continue impudently defrauding US courts. It won’t end well for them. I hope that one of the Does in the instant case will explain to Judge Hughes what is really going on in his courtroom.

110 E Center St Ste 2053, Madison, South Dakota 57042-2908
the address of a Guardaley’s shell, a fake company Crystal Bay Corporation



Hilarity continues. What can I say? Certain Vogt’s manly bits are undoubtedly busted:

Order to Amend

By 2:00 p.m. on August 8, 2014, Dallas Buyers Club, LLC, must amend its complaint to specify, as nearly as it can, by technical description or otherwise, the people whom it has sued. It must remove all mention of “Does” or similar fictions.


So, our poor troll with a little soul did exactly what the judge told him not to do: replaced one fiction (“Doe”) with another (bizarre “Internet User and Subscriber to IP address XX.XX.XX.XX located in Houston, Texas”). The bust is scheduled to August 12: I hope that “prolonged tirades” will be properly transcribed. Vogt will appear by telephone [update: I misunderstood it — Vogd was ordered to appear in person], and a local attorney named Daniel R. Kirshbaum will enjoy his own spanking in person.


Oh my… Local counsel cries he doesn’t know anything, and Vogt apparently soiled his pants: filed a second motion to reset hearing at the last moment (18:01). I’m sure Judge Hughes will be happy:

Plaintiff respectfully requests that the hearing set for August 12, 2014, at 3:30 p.m. be reset to anytime convenient to the Court between August 20, 2014 and August 22, 2014. Plaintiff’s counsel mistakenly believed that Mr. Keith A. Vogt would have been able to attend the hearing by telephone so as to full comply with Rule 4 of Judge Hughes’s Procedures.

The additional time will allow Mr. Vogt to make the necessary arrangements to attend the hearing. Plaintiff’s other counsel, Mr. Kirshbaum is acting solely as local counsel. Mr. Kirshbaum is not as knowledgeable as Mr. Vogt about the substantive issues in this matter, which the court may wish to address.

…and the motion was denied at 20:27.


wordpress counter


13 responses to ‘Judge Lynn Hughes does not mince words

  1. So this means the dirt-bags Troll/Plaintiff is going to try and squeeze out as many settlements as possible before they dismiss the case just prior to the deadline to serve Defendants. Thank God Texas has some sane judges. Can we get a few transferred to IL and CO???

    If you are one of the Does in this TX case, do nothing and wait this out. With all the problems this cases is going to have (beside this judge), the Troll is going to cut and run at the last minute. Hey Maurice Ross, do you feel like chiming in on this one???

    DTD 🙂

  2. So if my review of the case dockets is correct, the Judge has ordered them to serve the defendants within 60 days, but has not okayed the motion to serve 3rd party subpoenas for early discovery. It may be that he has and it just isn’t on the Internet Archive version of the docket yet, I haven’t checked it on Pacer.

    • Missing a relevant TF article is nearly an impossible event 🙂

      Surely they can use this as an additional “proof” (the previous such system had a significant error margin) to apply pressure to defendants, yet I strongly doubt this information can be used in a trial: the methodology should be vetted, preferably with cooperation from Bitindex. Highly unlikely.

      Did I say trial? My mind went traveled too far to the Fantasyland today…

      P.S. I saw a dream that there is a TF article discussing the fees trolls pay to ISPs for selling out their customers…

  3. “Mr. Kirshbaum is acting solely as local counsel. Mr. Kirshbaum is not as knowledgeable as Mr. Vogt about the substantive issues in this matter, which the court may wish to address. ”

    So a local signed up to just rubber stamp another lawyers work as his own?
    Due Diligence, its not just for OTHER lawyers.
    If you are uninformed on the matters at hand on the case, why the hell did you sign your name?
    Oh thats right, you signed up for the give me a check and handle all the hard parts for me program.
    I’m SURE the Judge will look kindly on someone representing themselves as a lawyer in this case who can not relay the relevant facts to the court without a chaperone.

    • Even more, after a forensic examination, I conclude with 99% certainty that that motion was 100% written by Vogt (or Germans): same pdf fingerprint.

      • Is Vogt even admitted in TX?
        Wouldn’t that be a kick in the ass… sorry your honor I totes had to stop your conference thingy because I am busy lawyer man… who isn’t a member of the bar & shouldn’t be making motions without admission.

        • No, he is not. I don’t know Texas rules. In some districts formal pro hac vice application is required, but in others any lawyer can pay a fee and litigate.

        • @SJD Yeah I am SURE the Judge will take kindly to someone who isn’t a party to this case telling the court they have to wait…. *falls over laughing*
          Motion Denied you say?
          Local freaking out you say?
          I see a motion to dismiss without prejudice in the near future…

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 )

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s