Copyright Troll Dismisses Defendant Cisa Without Motioning For A Default Judgement, 1:12-cv-00656, Sunlust Pictures, LLC v. Cisa (CO)

Almost the new year and the Copyright Trolls are getting no breaks.  ;(  Today I looked at the docket for 1:12-cv-00656, Sunlust Pictures, LLC v. Cisa (CO), and found a little new years surprise – Document 99.


Troll Anderson and the bright minds at Prenda Law Inc., (AKA: Anti-Piracy Law Group) decided to dismiss the case against Cisa.  DismissedWOP_00656(CO) 

Didn’t even bother to address the issue of violating the judge’s order in not contacting the joint tortfeasors.  My prior Cisa case post.  What a tool.  I don’t know if the judge will do anything, but as it is now on record, it is much harder to hide.  I’m sure Prenda has violated this order in locations other than VA, so it may still come to haunt them.  Even if this case is closed, it isn’t going to be pretty trying to explain to a new judge why they violated another court’s order, dismissed it outright, and then went to a new court.

As they didn’t go for a default judgement against Mr. Cisa, I bet Prenda is still going to try to pressure the remaining joint tortfeasors in other jurisdictions.  They had done their due diligence and it was ripe for a default.  If you were part of this case, please contact me if you receive any communication from the Trolls.  Any spin-off cases are ripe for more torpedos.

Happy New Year

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 -
This entry was posted in depositions and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Copyright Troll Dismisses Defendant Cisa Without Motioning For A Default Judgement, 1:12-cv-00656, Sunlust Pictures, LLC v. Cisa (CO)

  1. Sausages says:

    I like that above mr steele is an ’emergency exit’. After the granted discovery for the doe re: Alan Cooper, he may want to seek one quickly. –

  2. Irritated Troll Hater says:

    Damn… Must be nice to ride in what looks like a limo, and be surrounded by women. Not to mention the amount of alcohol. What a fantastic example of a lawyer he is.

  3. Johndoe says:


  4. The Tod says:

    “….this bud is for you!” -Classic DTD!! Classic!

  5. Clan says:

    Stupid question, but one that i’m panicking about right now. I received a letter that my information was going to be released as part of a subpoena between AF Holdings LLC and another individual. The case in question is for downloading a video called Sexual Obsession, which I honestly can’t remember ever doing. However, the thing is that my IP address and the IP address listed in the subpoena do not match. Is this a valid reason to quash the motion? Also, since the IP addresses do not match does it even matter if they release my information? Thanks.

  6. Clan says:

    I recently received a letter from my cable subscriber saying that they were going to release my information as it relates to a IP address used to download some movie called “Sexual Obsession”. No idea that I ever downloaded the movie and the IP address in question is not even my IP address. Is that enough reason to quash the subpoena or does it not even matter, since that’s not my IP address? Essentially, I just want to tell all involved to leave me alone since it’s not my IP address. Also, “Sexual Obsession”?

    • DieTrollDie says:

      Changed your name. Becareful. DTD 🙂

    • that anonymous coward says:

      Stop. No Full Stop. Take a deep breath. Hold it. Now let it out.
      IP addresses are not like your drivers license number or social security number, they often change. What it was at the time of the alleged downloading and what it is today is not related to each other.
      Stop. Take another breath. Hold it. Now let it out.
      AF Holdings LLC is a client of Prenda Law (we’ll call them Pretenda for short).
      Oh wait they are trying a new name now.
      The primary troll of the firm is John Steele, You’ll want to read up on him right quick.
      There is VAST coverage of him here and on
      He recently hired a criminal law firm to answer charges made against him in court in a case similar to yours. Prenda Law is not in good standing in IL, it seems to be how they operate and avoid having to file documents with the state. They are rolling into a new firm name which “SURPRISE” is in the same offices.

      I am unfamiliar with the details of your specific case. If you Google the case number assigned to your case (it should be in the letter sent to you), you can find out how many other people were targeted. If the number of Does is low, you need to be very cautious speaking about it. Also see if the case is already listed here, on Fightcopyrighttrolls or if Copyright Clerk has posted any information.

      More than likely Prenda (or what ever their name will be this week) will bother you at some point, but you can get educated about how this works, what to say what to not say, and then you can make an educated decision.

      It is not as bad as you imagine, your not alone. The best thing you can do for yourself is read up on how this works. If you have questions ask them. Then make the decision that works best for you.

      I remain…

  7. Dough says:

    Other than the VA cases has anyone else from this case actually received a summons that anyone is aware of?

  8. DTD – Did you notice that most of the Sunlust cases have been dismissed? Seems like each friday since 12/14, the cases were dismissed in succession. I made a dismissal list:

    • that anonymous coward says:

      Now if only they’d resign from the bar, things would get better.

    • Dough says:

      So for the folks that were named, is this ordeal over for them?

      • DieTrollDie says:

        Only Cisa was named in this case. Prenda does have contact information for many of the Does. Also note that this is the first dismissal, so Prenda/Plaintiff can refile a cases it if decides to. It would be a really stupid move IMO, but sometimes greed makes people do it. Any new case associated to this one is going to stink and Prenda is going to have to answer many uncomfortable questions. It make more sense for them to let this one die and count their profits. As this case had so many Does, they likely made a ton of money from the settlements. If only 20% of the 1385 Does settled for $3400 (277 * $3400), they would make $941,800!!! Hell of a return on investment.

        DTD 🙂

  9. Dough says:

    I mean the people that were originally in the Cisa case but then named in an entirely new case.

    • DieTrollDie says:

      The Troll would be really stupid to continue with ANY single named cases that came from this one. They will likely threaten a law suit, but that is about it. For any such cases, I would expect Prenda to dismiss it quietly and move to new cases. Do you know of any such cases? Drop me an email if you do –

      DTD 🙂

  10. DieTrollDie says:


    I just took a look at one of the named defendant cases from your post ( and the IP address was in the CO Cisa case (1:12-cv-00656). I bet majority of these Sunlust named cases came from Cisa. As each one had a summons issued after the CO court prohibited contact with these joint tortfeasors, Plaintiff has violated the court order multiple times and in multiple jurisdictions.

    DTD 🙂

  11. Pingback: DTD Torpedo Strikes 2:12-cv-08333, Inginuity 13, LLC (Prenda Fraud Company), v. John Doe (CA) | DieTrollDie

  12. Pingback: AZ Troll Motions To Strike DTD Torpedo & Order To Show Cause – AF Holdings LLC, 2:12-cv-02144 | DieTrollDie

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s