Florida state cases (Pure bill of discovery)

If you are looking for the information and discussion of the Lightspeed Media Corp v. Does 12-05673 CA 05, visit the Lightspeed password hacking cases page.

Florida has a little used and relatively archaic law on the books allowing a Complaint for Pure Bill of Discovery. You can read more about it here.

Trolls have been filing cases using this law to unmask Does by subpoena and extract settlements. Does who don’t settle or dispute may then be referred out to other trolls for actual lawsuit. Jurisdiction and joinder have so far been a non-issue and Florida does not yet seem to mind that their discovery law is being used as a fishing expedition. You can review a motion that outlines the Steele fIrm’s argument for use of this law and issuance of subpoenas here.

Additionally, in some cases the the usual Plaintiffs (Patrick Collins, K-Beech, Third Degree, Raw Films, Diabolic, Nucorp. Berlin Media and Zero Tolerance) are joined together against hundreds of Does for what can only be multiple different works and swarms. I don’t see how this can possibly be proper and only serves to deny the court the filing fees it is due.

Sooner or later, and I hope sooner, someone in Florida (I’m looking at you, State Bar and Attorney General) will take notice of this practice. I am also hoping that the trolls eventually name a state Doe in Federal court so that a Federal judge will take note of what Florida is doing regarding subject matter over which they clearly have no jurisdiction.

The whole thing stinks and is riddled with what appear to be egregious abuses, but that’s nothing new.

Doette, 12/07/11

Another interesting read regarding the specifics of Florida cases: The Latest in Nationwide Internet User Identification – Part 1 (The Ancient State Law “Pure Bill of Discovery”)

A good 2004 article in the The Florida Bar Journal: The Complaint for a Pure Bill of Discovery & mdash; A Living, Breathing, Modern Day Dinosaur? by Daniel Morman.

Obtaining court documents

Unfortunately, unlike federal court system, state/county courts make it a hassle and prohibitively expensive to obtain court documents. I bet trolls love this aspect.

Our online docket for case information is available at
http://www.miami-dadeclerk.com/home.asp click on Civil/Probate Records

At this time we do not accept case filings via email.

Copies of documents in the file can be obtained:

in person – at our office in the Dade County Courthouse – 73 W. Flagler Street – Room 133 – Monday thru Friday 9:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.

by mail – our correspondence section handles all copy orders by mail. We do not take copy requests via e-mail. Fees are $1.00 per page and $2.00 to certify a document. You can contact the Correspondence unit at 305-349-7464 for information on the number of pages. The mailing address is Clerk of Courts – Correspondence Unit – 73 W. Flagler St., Room 137, Miami, Fl 33130. Please send a self addressed stamped envelope along with your request.

Update from a Doe:

Here’s an updated number for the Miami-Dade Clerk Correspondence Dept.: 305 349-7451. Took a lot of detective work to get it. This is the only number I was able to reach a human. The one provided in a previous comment is never picked up. The process of obtaining court docs is incredibly slow and expensive (snail mail request & delivery / $1 per page). I couldn’t even get a local attorney to sell me a copy.

Blog posts

There are couple of posts about Lightspeed cases: consider reading comments: tons of insight.

Cases

Per community request, I started adding separate pages per case. The idea is to unite Does and hopefully share legal expenses. If you want a page for a specific case added, do not hesitate to email me.

wordpress counter

Discussion

732 responses to ‘Florida state cases (Pure bill of discovery)

  1. Does anyone know what is going on with Florida case # 11-24714 CA? These trolls continue to leave their weekly voicemail message that sounds like it is being read from a script. I’m up to about 14 messages now over the last 6 months. They started calling at the end of October last year and so far that is all they have done is call and leave messages ever since. I have yet to return any calls, have no plans on doing so, and they have done nothing more than calling week after week with the same idle threats. I have been on the Miami-Dade County Clerk site and checked on the case, it hasn’t had any updates since 3/12/2012. Does anyone know if this case is actually going anywhere or even near being thrown out of court yet so these trolls will stop harassing me?

    • If trolls are calling, then functionally they have discovery, which was all the Miami-Dade county case was after. Infringement is a Federal matter, so trolls would need to file (a new case & pay a new fee) in your state jurisdiction’s Federal civil court to go farther.

      Hiring a lawyer will make it necessary for trolls to make all contacts through the lawyer. There will be a fee. It’s possible to wait things out. Being named and served in a case would need a response to a court. It’s also possible that having a lawyer will discourage trolls from thinking about further action. Reports here and other places say this is very rare. Check the discussion by state here under your state. You’ll probably see troll cases in your jurisdiction are going poorly for the trolls.

      By the date of the Miami-Dade, the alleged infringement date was at least 9 months ago. Longer time since the allegation may make actual legal proceedings harder for a troll plaintiff, especially as trolling gets a poorer reputation.

      The troll calls themselves may be unlawful. Keep records (and recordings) as much as possible. If the trolls claim they are debt collectors, they have more leeway legally but are still limited. Trolls have not won any decision so are not debt collectors AFAIK.

      Check your state Consumer Protection site about both telemarketing and debt collection. One site says according to Federal law “Within five days after its first contact with the consumer, the collection agency must send a written notice of the amount owed, the name of the business or lender to whom the debt is owed, and what the consumer should do if he believes he does not owe the money.” The troll callers may be breaking the law even for debt collectors. Laws for other intrusive calls are stricter. Complaints can be filed against harassing callers.

      As background, this is the case with 1544 allegations against Does with very wrongful joinder: 8 plaintiffs (including U.K. & German corporations), at least 8 different works, Does in dozens of jurisdictions, most outside Florida. The troll porn purveyors are Patrick Collins INC, Third Degree Films INC, K Beech INC, Raw Films LTD, Diabolic Video Productions INC, Nucorp LTD, Berlin Media Art JT EK, & Zero Tolerance Entertainment INC.

      The attorney of record for this Miami-Dade county case is M. Keith Lipscomb of Lipscomb, Eisenberg & Baker, who has been associated with many troll porn purveyor cases. Attorneys filing for one of these plaintiffs in your jurisdiction may have a relation with Mr. Lipscomb.

      This is not legal advice and is for discussion purposes only.

    • Hi Marylander. Would you be willing to talk about your ordeal (anonymously)? I am a journalist working on an article about how these “pure bills of discovery” and would like to include some stories of the phone calls that follow. You seem to be experiencing that right now. Please let me know
      Michael Miller
      Staff Writer
      Miami New Times
      michael.miller@miaminewtimes.com

        • Very good article! Love the artwork. It’s nice to hear some words straight from the master troll’s mouth. I don’t know if he really believes the things he says, but he seems convincing.

          “”There is nothing unfair or unrighteous about holding a thief to account,” Lipscomb says.” Agree 100%. I think we’d all be fine with that *if that’s what was actually happening*

          One correction: “…says the founder of website fightcopyrighttrolls.com, who declines to give *his* name.”

          SJD stands for Sophisticated *Jane* Doe 😛

        • We know he doesn’t believe them because he runs from court any time a Doe expects him to put up evidence or proceed with a case. Just watch his minion Kotzer run from Fantalis in Colorado. Trolls prove time and again that they will not argue their cases in front of a jury because they don’t believe their cases have merit. If Lipscomb believed in anything he says or does he would be pushing the cases *he instigated* forward, but all he does is stonewall because he is a crook and a coward.

    • I’m sorry to hear this, I received a call from Malibu Media last week and they wanted to settle for $2800. I made the mistake of talking to them

  2. Any reason why PATRICK COLLINS INC vs DOES, JOHN (1-22) was dismissed by the court?

    13-2012-CA-008861-0000-01

    Filed 03/07/2012 and dismissed by the court on 04/25/2012.

  3. I’m in this case:
    Patrick Collins at al v Does 1-915 (11-37821-CA-22)

    Finally, after more than a month, there is a new docket entry:
    05/03/2012 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS

    Does anyone know what this means?

    (I also posted this question on the child page for my individual case.)

  4. There is a recent new case filing dated last week:

    MALIBU MEDIA (LLC) vs DOES, JOHN 1-88, Filing Date:  05/08/2012
    Case Number (LOCAL):  2012-18169-CA-01
    Case Number (STATE):  13-2012-CA-018169-0000-01

    The attorney of record is Emilie Kennedy, an Associate at Lipscomb, Eisenberg & Baker. No documents court online yet.

  5. Miami Dade county court Judge Gisela Cardonne Ely gives a disappointing 4/25/12 order, granting trolls discovery with extras. She allows Trolls a blank check to amend the complaint to add whatever Does & ISP’s they like, only 7 weeks after the original complaint. She bases this decision on a troll claim about data retention.This allows the trolls to select Does and ISP’s which they guess are easier targets. An amended Troll complaint was submitted on 5/2/12.

    The original complaint was filed for plaintiffs Patrick Collins Inc, Malibu Media LLC, Evil Angel Productions Inc., K-Beech Inc. and Nucorp LTD. It appears to have been filed on 3/07/12 (Case Number (LOCAL): 2012-8861-CA-01; Case Number (STATE): 13-2012-CA-008861-0000-01). The attorney of record is Thomas S. Ward of Rennert Vogel Mandler & Rodriguez, “a firm dedicated to giving its clients the highest quality of legal services.” The firm’s practice areas are real estate and corporate finance. They apparently do no copyright work. Previous Miami Dade cases for these plaintiffs were filed by M. Keith Lipscomb of Lipscomb, Eisenberg & Baker.

    excerpts from Judge Cardonne Ely’s 4/25/12 order:

    “5. Plaintiff has explained due to data retention it is unlike the original John doe Defendants will be identified. Consequently, Plaintiff…is permitted to add new John Doe Defendants through an Amended Complaint that shall be filed within ten days of the date of this Order. For the avoidance of doubt….no further order granting Plaintiff leave to serve subpoenas on the Defendants’ internet service providers shall be necessary.”

    • No biggie. It’s a 10-day extension. Just part of the legal process. It’s far from any kind of ruling, and the longer the trolls extend this litigation out, the worse it turns out for them.

  6. PissedoffJohnDoe,

    For 10/19/2011 LIGHTSPEED MEDIA CORP vs DOES 1-160 2011-34345-CA-01

    If you are not doing it yet, you can look up the case at the Miami Dade clerk of courts site by searching for “Lightspeed Media” in the “Party Name” space. Click on “Dockets” when you find the entry.

    There was an amended complaint filed on 5/11/12. I have no direct info. If the ruling is similar to Judge Gisela Cardonne Ely’s recent ruling for Patrick Collins Inc., the judge may have allowed the trolls to add names to their list.

    • It says “Notice Voluntary Dismissal of Unknown Party” I know what voluntary dismissal is, but who is the unknown party? Just a John Doe?

        • So this probably means they’re beginning to dismiss those who have paid the settlement or have a lawyer representing them? Im just trying to stay on top of this case to predict what may happen next. Thanks.

  7. There’s a porn convention in Miami this weekend, so I guess all the Troll lawyers are having fun. I’m not saying that all the Troll lawyers are getting comped to the convention and the parties and I’m not suggesting that they are all getting free coke and free sex with lower level pornstars; but it’s happening.

    I wonder if the poor guys who are working the phones, you know, the ones trying to get settlements out of the Does; are they able to get any pornstar action? Maybe a BJ from a fluffer – if that.

    I wonder if the pornstars who are strong armed into having sex with Trolls enjoy it? I bet most of the pornstars fall in love with the Trolls that they are coerced into having sex with.

    “Ugh, he was such a Troll!” she moaned, despite being completely unaware of copyright litigation and derisive nicknames; and also politics, pop culture and gravity. “I want my full rate for that, plus anal,” she fumed, “He was so gross! Anytime they have us do it with a lawyer, I wanna puke! They are all so gross! Every single one of them! Inside and out! They all look just like Trolls!”

    Not that it’s legally relevant, but an aggressive Doe defense should include hiring private investigators who expose Trolls who are cheating on their wives with pornstars, or with their staff, or with neighbors, distant cousins, and waitresses. Actually, that might not work so well because most Trolls, even the relatively young ones, are probably on their 3rd wives by now, and those wives probably don’t care about infidelity, and may even encourage it and join in, but still. Look, I’m not saying that all Trolls have threesomes with their wives and a pornstar, I’m just saying that most do.

    Let’s get serious: Trolls are trying to get us for infringing on a copyright, but they are also trying to shame us. Shame us for what? After all, everyone watches porn. But what are the Trolls doing? Are they accepting sex with pornstars in exchange for a discount in legal fees? Or is it just a bonus? The trolls are dirtier than we are. Actually, we are not even dirty, and they are very dirty. Wouldn’t it be fun for a Doe to trail a Troll with a Dick and send the findings to the Trolls wife or kids?

    • Case dismissed! Doe innocent! Troll exposed as John! Pornographer plaintiff found to be a Pimp!

  8. Hello. Got Another question. The docket for Lightspeed Media case 2011-34345-CA-01, said cancellation notice. What does this mean? Thanks.

  9. Anyone know what’s going on with 31922? There was a “special hearing” entry for 5/22 that was cancelled. There seemed to have bee lots of activity (motions etc.) but no clear outcome.

  10. So, I’m checking in on my case (2011-29024-CA-01), and I found an interesting entry:

    05/17/2012 – NON-PARTY REQUEST FOR APPLICATION OF THE COURTS 03/28/12

    Other than the annoying fact that this is hitting the online docket for what appears to be almost two months late, I have no clue what this means. Can anyone shed some light on this?

    Thanks!

    • The 5/17/12 docket entry is from the ISPs who are seeking to be included in the Courts 3/28/12 Order quashing the subpoenas. The Judge in that order stated any ISP that had not filed a Motion to Quash on behalf of their subscribers be notified of their right to do so, and several other ISP’s decided to join in, including comcast, who I had filed Motions to Quash on behalf of several of their John Doe subscribers. The Plaintiff in that case will be filing an amended complaint against the remaining John Does who are not covered by the Courts Order and the subsequent extended application of that order if their ISP’s failed to join in.

      • Good to know, thanks Richard!

        As a Comcast subscriber, I find it pretty shocking that they are defending their John Does.

  11. First of all thanks for all the info in this site about this scam…..Any info on the case NU Image, Inc v. Does 1-2, 515, filed in the USDC of Middle District of Florida?

  12. ok so we are going on six months of letters and phone calls. we are at 4 letters and 3 phone calls, 2 of those phone calls being within the last 2 weeks. this phone call today, made me nervous as Mark Lutz states that his client has extended our deadline and we have not heard from you, looks like we will go further. they have more lawyers and plan on filing a lawsuit against us. He asked for us to call him or look up on their website for the info we need. Now we have spoken to an attorney who has advised us to make no contact with this office at all. We have even notified the attorney general in our state of this. If you can give any info to help ease our minds or where this is going would be great! Our case is 11-31922 CA 4, Millennium TGA Inc.(1-515 Does). Please any help!

  13. ok so we are wrapped up in one of these. I have commented on here before but need some info as we haven’t been able to find any. our case is 11-31922 CA 4, Millenium TGA, Inc. We have gotten 3/4 letters now and 3 phone calls. Mark Lutz just called today stating he has given an extension and we have not responded. That they have more lawyers and plan on filing a lawsuit against us. Got a little nervous as this message was not nice, he was very arrogant on the phone. Any info on our case would be helpful. My husband has a pacer account but was unable to find it even in the courts, what does this even mean? please any help! Thanks!

  14. So I’m trying to figure out where things stand on my case 13-2011-CA-032619-0000-01, Millennium TGA, Inc. vs John Does 1-529. My ISP turned my info over to them on Feb 3. They got my info before I had a proper chance to prevent that (didn’t get notice until a couple days before court date). So they sent me a letter and then a couple of weeks later another. Then nothing for over a month and then another letter and nothing since and that was almost two months ago. I have had no communication with them, just their letters which I ignored. I checked the Miami-Dade clerk site and there was a motion to strike granted on 3/30/12, which I could not find out if that was for just one plaintiff or the entire case. Then I check again today and I see that for the first time since 3/30 there was something added: on 6/08 there was a “stipulation for substitution of counsel.” I can only assume the case is still ongoing then. Can anyone with better understanding of these things explain to me if my case is still open or what. Was the motion to strike limited to one plaintiff? Why no further docket entries for over 2 months and now this substitution of counsel thing? Thanks in advance for any help anyone might be able to give.

  15. I live in FL, and I got one of these notices from ComCast. I have an old/no longer used mobile phone number on record with them and no phone number associated with my address. Should I just leave my contact information with ComCast the way it is and let the troll call whoever inherited my old phone number (left it with an old mobile carrier), and wait for them to send me a certified letter? Or should I update my contact information with contact and actually talk to these people?

    I’ve never heard of the title they mentioned in the subpoena; after reading this website I understand what the game is and how they’re bullying people, but I’m not sure how to respond (if at all?). As they’re counting on, I’d rather not let my name be associated with something so vulgar-sounding, but at the same time I want to protect my own integrity and innocence, because I have nothing to do with what I’m potentially going to be accused of!

    I’ve read most of the advice here, but I’m just not sure what to do about my contact information with the cable company…

  16. New Old Shinola Alert:

    Copyright troll lawyer Michael Keith Lipscomb filed a new suit in Miami-Dade county court on 7/6/12 for the porn purveyor plaintiff, Patrick Collins, Inc.

    It appears to be a mass suit, with wrong jurisdiction for most of the 279 Does probably outside Florida.

    PATRICK COLLINS INC vs JONH DOES 1-279
    Local #: 2012-26292-CA-01
    State #: 13-2012-CA-026292-0000-01

  17. I’m a journalist for the Miami New Times looking into how Florida courts enable porn companies from around the world to discover the names of supposed copyright violators. I’ve spoken to one woman who has filed a class-action suit against these companies for calling her work office and trying to shame/harass her into paying a settlement. I would like to hear from anyone else who has had this happen to them. Conversations can be anonymous. Please send me an email if interested in getting your side of the story out. Thanks. michael.miller@miaminewtimes.com

    • SJD,

      is this guy legit?, Just checking 1st, very paranoid now a days.

      keep up the great work

      • Being a bit paranoid is encouraged here 🙂

        Do you think that any of the troll bozos are capable of forging a corporate email? A quick search and you’ll see that Miami News Times is a news outlet, and Michael Miller writes for it.

        • thanks, I really wanted to know if we can trust him, you never know, since we’ve seen lawyers switch sides in mid stream (see the paranoid person that I am).

          thanks again

      • I understand your concerns. I can assure you, however, that I really am a journalist for the alt weekly The Miami New Times (part of the Village Voice chain). If you have a story to tell, email me and we can talk. Thanks.

    • Hey Michael, you may want to look into Joanne Diaz, she used to work for Steele Hansmeier / Prenda Law and now works for the Florida attorney general’s office. It might be interesting and illuminating to investigate the possible implications of an extortion outfit inserting one of their lawyers into government.

        • The attorney in question has her attorney-of-record as “JOANNE DIEZ” (Florida Bar #276110),
          for the Miami-Dade county case LIGHTSPEED MEDIA CORP vs DOES 1-160:
          Filing Date:  10/19/2011 
          Case Number (LOCAL):  2011-34345-CA-01
          Case Number (STATE):  13-2011-CA-034345-0000-01

          I recall her co-signing at least a couple of filings of the Prenda gang. In fairness, it’s not clear how long her association with Prenda was. It may have been short. Recall that when Prenda packed its bags in Illinois, they, ahem, seemed to borrow the signatory assistance of one or more Florida-based attorneys.

          According to web listings, she appears to have gotten her J.D. from Loyola University New Orleans School of Law in 1999. She was admitted to the Florida Bar in April 2000. Her undergraduate work is listed as Florida International University, B.B.A.

          The only Prenda documents I’ve seen with her name on them were from autumn of 2011. By January 2012, her name appears on Florida Attorney General submissions. I looked over a few documents of her (Florida AG) documents since then. There’s no casework there with any bearing on the troll schemes.

        • Funny how you can see in her LinkedIn profile who the other viewers searched for. Familiar names?

          Maybe she took Peiffer/Leskos advise and jumped ship before ruining her career.

  18. Go evening folks! any of you have any info on case 1:12-CV-21489-PAS. It was initially filed on April 20 or 24 by Aerosoft GMHB to John Does 1-50. As you can assume I’m one of the joe’s that received the subpoena letters from comcast, first time I am in a situation like this, any advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks

  19. Go evening folks! any of you have any info on case 1:12-CV-21489-PAS. It was initially filed on April 20 or 24 by Aerosoft GMHB to John Does 1-50. As you can assume I’m one of the joe’s that received the subpoena letters from comcast, first time I am in a situation like this, any advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

  20. Anything new with case 11-37821 ca22? Continue to get calls from some bufoon named Bill Higgins!!!

  21. Has anyone noticed that the Miami-Dade county crap is still going on?

    A NEW case was filed on 7/31/12 by apparently a Lipscomb, Eisenberg and Baker associate, Emilie Kennedy. She lists the same address as the partners. She apparently is assisting in the work of copyright trolling on behalf of porn purveyors.

    Since there are three different plaintiffs, Patrick Collins Inc., Third Degree Films Inc., and Malibu Media LLC, it sounds like joinder is improper. Maybe the small number of Does (for Lipscomb & crew’s FLA county cases) is due to jurisdiction problems raised in previous cases. Maybe the trolls hope that a lower number of allegations will keep the case and defendant objections very low profile.

  22. I am currently one of the Does in this new case 12-26292 CA 27, Miami-Dade Circuit Court: Patrick Collins, Inc., Malibu Media, LLC., & Third Degree Films vs John Does 1-279. I have just received the notice of subpoena from my ISP and am contemplating hiring a lawyer to file a MTQ.

    After speaking with several lawyers on the matter, it is clear that they are divided on the issue of whether or not actually filing the MTQ is worth it / a smart move. Some said it should be the end of the whole ordeal (no guarantees, however.) Another said it would just piss off Lipscum (this particular attorney knew Lipscum personally) and ultimately be a waste of money as he would just come after me individually, either as a Doe again or after obtaining my identity.

    Another attorney, (who is not liscenced to practice in Miami-Dade & therefore stood nothing to profit from me) advised to let the trolls have my info and when their first demand letter came to just hire a lawyer to notify the trolls I would not settle. He said that sometimes fling the MTQ will put you on the Trolls radar and show you have expendable income and if you wind up being targeted anyway it’s really just a waste of money. I should add that I’d prefer not to edit my own MTQ based on the templates here. I really would rather have a professional do it.

    So my question to all you is this; is a MTQ worth it? Is it even a smart move? How often are these motions successful and actually the end to all this nonsense? In a case with 279 Does, wouldn’t the trolls rather save their money on an appeal to my MTQ and just move on to the other Does whose info they were able to get?

    Or,

    am I better off letting the trolls have my info and just ignoring their harrassment until if/when they actually serve me with a court summons?

    I really just want this to go away as quickly & cost-efficiently as possible. I do not mind spending some money on a lawyer for this MTQ but I refuse to give a dime to these extortionists in a settlement. Oh, and I REALLY do not want these scumbags to have my personal information. Nor do I really want to entertain the notion of the (rare) possiblity of this going to trial.

    Thoughts, answers, and advice on the MTQ issue are all much appreciated. Good luck to all you other Does out there.

    • This is not legal advice…. but I too got caught up with Troll Lipscum as well. Unfortunately my ISP failed to inform me and I found out by getting harrassing phone calls from these p.o.s sumbags. Same bullsh*t on every call but nothing has happened to me. Funny, but more than a year later I still have no clue what “quality works” I have “infringed”. Yeah, it’s a Patrick Collins thing but that means nothing to me. I have no intention of settling and would rather spend my money defending myself and filing a counterclaim against the scumbags. And I will if I am ever served. Every situation is different but if I were you I’d let it play out. Save your money and don’t let the harrassment get to you.

      • Hey Sol. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I’m a reporter for the Miami New Times writing about Lipscomb and, more generally, about the use of pure bills of discovery to sue alleged copyright violators. I’ve spoken to a woman in Kentucky about her class-action suit against Lipscomb’s porn company clients, but I’m looking for Florida residents. I would love to talk to you, anonymously if you prefer. If you’re interested, please email me: michael.miller@miaminewtimes.com
        Thanks very much. I hope to hear from you. If you have any doubts about my identity or intentions, please take a look at my past articles on my newspaper’s (miaminewtimes.com)

  23. M. Keith Lipscomb filed two new cases on 8/17/12 in Miami-Dade County court as agent for the porn purveyors Patrick Collins Inc. & Malibu Media LLC. Malibu Media LLC is listed as an additional plaintiff in both cases.

    PATRICK COLLINS INC vs DOES, JOHN
    Local:2012-32595-CA-01; State: 13-2012-CA-032595-0000-01

    PATRICK COLLINS INC vs DOES, JOHN
    Local: 2012-32591-CA-01; State: 13-2012-CA-032591-0000-01

    Has anyone gotten information about these cases ?

  24. Bill Higgins has been nice enough to call and not leave any messages. I think my case is 2011-24714-CA-01 based on the garbles that he and his cohorts have made concerning a federal case. What exactly is the disposition of the case?

  25. The case I was involved in appears to be dismissed (2011-13848-CA-01). Due these civil cases follow the same standards as the Fed courts where they cannot go after after you’ve been dismissed twice?

    What are my options if Lip-scum continues his extortion racked by enlisting a call center to threaten me after the case has been dismissed? Since I was never named in the suit, do I have ground to stand on?

    • Not sure if I am reading the dockets correctly, but I don’t think the case is dismissed, just another doe was.

      Please someone chime in.

      “Don’t feed the Trolls!!!”

      • I have no direct knowledge. But you might see if William Wohlsifer’s office would do a free consultation or brief reply and let you know the status of the case. His website lists the case you mention as one he has worked on:

        http://infringement-attorney.com/bittorrentlawsuits/casess.html

        Please note that this is not necessarily an endorsement (nor criticism) of Mr. Wohlsifer, whose services I have no experience with. I just mention it as one possibility to track down this information quickly.

        By the way, just in the Miami-Dade state court of Florida cases that Wohlsifer lists where the number of Does are included, there are over 4,000 Does in just nine of the cases. As usual, this is major distortion of legal process by trolls.

  26. So, I’ve been following SJD’s website for a long time now, and I haven’t heard much news on some of these older Florida cases, particularly the one I’m lucky enough to be part of [2011-29024-CA-01; Boy Racer Inc vs. John Does (1-615)].

    With the exception of some JD dismissals here and there, I haven’t heard much information back about this case since the confusion over the dismissal (and subsequent vacating of said dismissal).

    Does anybody have any information on this one? There doesn’t seem to be much court activity.

    • I, too, am curious about this one. Have defendants been identified, and have settlement offers been mailed out yet?

      • To find your case:

        1. open http://www2.miami-dadeclerk.com/civil/Search.aspx and type ‘Boy Racer’ for the plaintiff
        2. Find your case and click on the ‘Dockets’ link on the right side of the case.

        I looked a bit at your case and noticed a filing on 03/16/2012 with the following information (pg 8/9).

        Being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that:

        1. The Plaintiff’s Supplemental Motion is DENIED.
        2. All motions filed by Defendant John Does 233, 376, and 486, identified by Plaintiff as the Defendants related to the IP addresses….respectively (the “Dismissed Defendants”) are GRANTED.
        3. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.
        4. This Court’s Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Non-Party Internet Service Providers (“ISP’s”) To Disclose Identifying Information Regarding Unknown John Doe Defendants 1-615, dated October 13, 2011, is VACATED in its entirety and the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are relieved of their obligation to respond to any subpoenas served by the plaintiff.
        5. Counsel for Plaintiff shall provide a copy of this Order to all ISPs identified in Exhibit A to the Complaint in this action, within 5 days of the date of this Order.

        I’m no lawyer, but items 3 and 4 look like the case died.

  27. Pillsbury doughboy Lipscomb is back, just fied two more single cases in FSDC. How long will this racket last?

  28. Also wondering about whether these state cases ever get closed or dismissed. The Miami-Dade Clerk website is no help. Looking at some of the older cases, it looks like they just stay open forever.

  29. Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your
    blog and wanted to say that I have truly enjoyed browsing your blog posts.

    After all I will be subscribing to your rss feed and I hope you write again
    soon!

  30. The just like you go through my thoughts! You appear to knowledge a lot somewhere around this specific, as if you wrote this e-book within it or something. I do think you can do by incorporating w. c. to operate a vehicle the solution residence slightly, although other than that, that is perfect weblog. An outstanding go through. I’ll certainly backside.

Comments are closed.