Judge Stops Release of Subscriber Information – AF Holdings LLC. v. Matthew Ciccone (Michigan 300), 4:12-cv-14442 (MI)

This case is becoming a busy one, probably more than Prenda Law/John Steele would have wished for.  It appears many of the non-party Does in this case don’t want the ISPs to release their personal information to the Trolls.  Attorney John Herman has filed over 10 motions for these Does and the court took notice of it.  On 30 Jan 13, Judge Gershwin Darin, issued an order in an attempt to manage the case effectively.   Order_StopSubp_14442(MI)

…The Court granted the parties’ joint motion upon the representations made that granting the parties’ request would be “in the Court’s interest” and “lead to a just and speedy final resolution of this matter.” See Dkt. No. 10 at 2. Unfortunately, the intended result has not materialized, rather the Court has been bombarded with motions filed on behalf of the alleged participants seeking to quash the Rule 45 subpoenas, to intervene and/or for protective orders. See Dkt. Nos. 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 33, 39, 41, 45, and 46.  On January 24, 2013, this Court set oral argument on twelve of these motions. See Dkt. No. 36.  Since the Court noticed oral argument for these motions, four more motions to quash and/or to intervene have been filed.

The number of pending motions to quash and/or to intervene has rendered this matter unnecessarily time consuming for the Court, especially in light of the fact that eleven out of the sixteen pending motions were filed by the same attorney, John Hermann, and contain identical arguments…

The court then struck all Herman motions except for Document #12, and included these people with #12.  He also instructed Mr. Herman that with any new clients with the same arguments, he should file a request to join to the existing motion.

The last part of the order is the really good.

The Court hereby advises Plaintiff’s counsel that he SHALL IMMEDIATELY notify the ISP providers of the pending motions to quash and that the ISP provider is prohibited from disclosing the subpoenaed information until the Court resolves the pending motions.

So this effectively put a hold on the release of the subscriber information for all 300 subscribers.  I would personally recommend sending the ISP a copy of the order, as Prenda Law is bound to screw that up.  I would also contact the court if you get called by Prenda Law prior to the court making a ruling on the motions.

Also of note is other attorneys, such as Eric Grimm have joined this case.  Here is a motion and exhibit Mr. Grimm filed on behalf of two WOW subscribers and one Charter subscriber.   Grimm_MotionInterV_14442(MI)   EX2_Nguyen_Trans_14442(MI)       Take a read of the motion and see that Mr. Grimm clearly informs the court of the true intent and purpose of the “agreement” between Plaintiff/Prenda Law and Mr. Ciccone.

Here, the subpoenas represent yet another questionable technique (in place of several other strategies that are failing in courts all over the country) to harvest non-party targets – to be called indiscriminately (innocent and putative infringer alike) and subjected to a so-called “enforcement” and litigation threat process resembling the practices of the consumer debt collection industry – that is calculated by an entity calling itself Prenda Law to be maximally extra-judicial and minimally court-supervised. Under these circumstances, the subpoenas ought to be quashed in their entirety as to all subscribers, and the moving subscribers respectfully so move.

Attached to the motion is a brief in support of the motion.

When Prenda Law is pursuing so-called “enforcement” activity, without judicial supervision, by cold-calling cable subscribers whose identities have been harvested, they have no real financial incentive to be careful in distinguishing innocent cable subscribers from actual downloaders, and every financial incentive to be careless and indiscriminate.

Moreover, Prenda Law and other lawyers engaging in what has come to be termed the “copyright troll” business, routinely propagate the myth that innocent subscribers can be sued for thousands of dollars for “negligence,” and therefore also ought to be shaken down for payment, whether or not they actually did any thing to violate the Copyright Act.

Prenda Law IncI don’t believe the judge is going to be too happy he has to address all these issues and the clearly questionable actions of Plaintiff/Prenda Law, Mr. Ciccone, and the Alan Cooper fraud question.

Archive Docket 4:12-cv-14442.

Previous case posting – 25 Jan 13.

DieTrollDie :)

About DieTrollDie

I'm one of the many 'John Does' (200,000+ & growing in the US) who Copyright Trolls have threatened with a civil law suit unless they are paid off. What is a Copyright Troll? Check out the Electronic Frontier Foundation link - http://www.eff.org/issues/copyright-trolls
This entry was posted in AF Holdings LLC, Prenda Law Inc. and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Judge Stops Release of Subscriber Information – AF Holdings LLC. v. Matthew Ciccone (Michigan 300), 4:12-cv-14442 (MI)

  1. SJD says:

    Which attorney will be first to file a judicial note describing the Minnesota event?

    • DieTrollDie says:

      Grimm mentioned it on page 10 of his motion. I wish he would have put it as part of the body of the motion and not a foot note. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/81004257/AlanCooper_14442(MI).JPG

      DTD :)

    • Raul says:

      In Grimm’s motion to intervene/quash he states that he will be filing a future more complete motion to quash. As we all know Prenda’s colorful history is extensive and hard for a legit attorney to immediately comprehend as it is intitially hard to believe. Looking very much forward to Grimm’s next filing once he has had a chance to absorb the full extent of Prenda’s shenanigans.

  2. The Tod says:

    Now the other Does need to get a different lawyer and start doing the same thing. This way the judge will see that these cases are unmanagable and have to tell poor Pretenda/John Steal to file individual lawsuits like everybody else.

    Sorry, we are talking about Pretenda Law, this ship will sink on its own. They literally have to create there own client, computer monitoring service, and of recent steal Alan Coopers idenity to have a CEO of a offshore company. The judicial system loves this kind of stuff. I guess we just need to create a Pretenda Law care (history) package and send it to every case the file.

    • Anonymous says:

      Would be a great idea to make a comprehensive list of all scams and BS pretenda has perpetrated and make it easy accessible for Does and lawyers so they have ammunition for these cases and can raise awareness to juridisdiction/courts/judges/attorney generals/and Doe lawyers who may be unfamiliar with prendas BS and dont have time or the means to educate themselves about the frauds.

  3. CTVic says:

    It’s great to see Eric Grimm getting in on some of the Prenda action! Grimm was one of the best lawyers that I consulted with back in the early days of the massive thousands-of-does cases. He struck me as the type who was really adept at keeping one ear to the ground and one eye on the horizon.
    It’s a shame that the scam has gone on so long that it still asks for his involvement, but I’m glad to see his name on some dockets :)

      • Anonymous says:

        Did Grimm’s clients get some kind of cast-iron immunity from the Plaintiff to get rid of him? Here’s another lulz from the response (apart from the beauty of quoting themselves as disproof the Cooper allegations)

        “Notwithstanding Movant’s total failure to substantiate this statement, it bears mentioning that Prenda Law is not counsel of record in this action—Jonathan W. Tappan, PLLC is the law firm handling this matter. Any discussion of Prenda Law is wholly irrelevant as to whether a subpoena in the instant case should be quashed or whether a protective order should issue.”

        This from the supposed guy (since I doubt Tappan actually wrote it) who, in the original complaint, gives Gibbs Prenda phone no. and the e-mail address blgibbs@wefightpiracy.com as his own.

  4. hank says:

    http://ia801607.us.archive.org/25/items/gov.uscourts.mied.274202/gov.uscourts.mied.274202.55.0.pdf

    “Before reaching the merits of Movant’s arguments, Plaintiff first addresses Movant’s
    defamatory statements. Movant states that “Alan Cooper’s identity had been used without his
    consent as the CEO of AF Holdings LLC . . .” (Id. at 6.) This statement is one in a long line of
    conspiracy theories raised by anonymous infringers against copyright holder plaintiffs. By way
    of example, infringers have accused copyright holders of suing fictitious defendants, of bribing
    federal judges and (as in this case) of identity theft. The common link between these conspiracy
    theories is that they are all categorically false.

    This instant conspiracy theory was first asserted by Attorney Paul Godfread in a cases
    brought by Plaintiff against defendants in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. In
    those cases, Plaintiff denied Attorney Godfread’s wild accusations. See, e.g., AF Holdings, LLC
    v. John Doe, No. 12-2689-RHK-JGG (D. Minn. Dec. 4, 2012), ECF No. 13 (“In his letter,
    Attorney Godfread accuses AF Holdings LLC of being a sham corporation and fraudulently
    holding his client out as its CEO. Both of these accusations are categorically false.”). “

  5. Pingback: “Lets Make A Deal!” – Prenda Law Inc. & the Michigan 300 – (AF Holdings LLC. v. Matthew Ciccone, 4:12-cv-14442) | DieTrollDie

  6. Biantai says:

    I am also involved in this case. Do I still take some action?

  7. JD says:

    Case has been dismissed.

  8. Pingback: Last-Minute Stipulated Dismissal of Ciccone And The Michigan 300 (AF Holdings LLC.), 4:12-cv-14442 (MI) | DieTrollDie

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s