AZ Court Dismisses AF Holdings LLC Case Against Christopher Heggum – 2:12-cv-02130 – Failure To Serve

The AZ AF Holdings LLC case against Christopher Heggum was part of the eight individual law suits that sprung from DC case # 1:11-cv-01274, AF Holdings LLC, v.  Does 1-1140, initially filed on 13 Jul 11.  As these are AF Holdings LLC cases, we expected them to be slowly closed down to avoid the ‘uncomfortable’ questions that are a result of the ‘Alan Cooper’ fraud/ID theft allegations/proceedings in California and Minnesota.  The other well-known Doe in these AZ cases is David Harris, who answered the complaint and made life a bit more difficult for the Prenda Law team.  As Mr. Harris has answered the complaint, Prenda Law will not have as easy of a time dismissing the case.  As they have used the Harris case as a launching platform to develop other Does, this one may stay open for a bit.   AZ Spin-Off Cases

As far as the Heggum case, on 10 Jan 13, the court ordered that if Plaintiff did not serve Mr. Heggum by 6 Feb 13, the case would be dismissed without further notice.  On 6 Feb 13 (The last day!!!!!), Troll Goodhue motioned the court for more time.  His “Good Cause” for the request???  Defendant Heggum was avoiding him.  Sure.  Resp_OSC_02130(AZ)   Resp_OSC_Decl_02130(AZ)

The court for some reason agreed to the request and gave Troll Goodhue until 7 Apr 13, to effect service.   ExtenToServe_02139(AZ)   Well, as expected, they failed to serve Mr. Heggum by that date.  So on 9 Apr 13, Judge Susan Bolton dismissed the case against Heggum.  Heggum_Dismissed_02130(AZ)    As this is now the second time a case on this matter has been dismissed against Heggum, it is effectively over for good – adjudicated on its merits.

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 Paul Duffy, Prenda Law Inc. and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to AZ Court Dismisses AF Holdings LLC Case Against Christopher Heggum – 2:12-cv-02130 – Failure To Serve

  1. doggedt says:

    thanks for keeping up the “good” fight, DTD!

  2. fran403 says:

    That Heggum guy sure can hide. 2 months of concentrated 24/7 evasion. 🙂

  3. Dirkmaster says:

    Why bother to request the extention if they had no intention of actually serving? By February, they had to know that serving would have opened the doors to uncomfortable questions. Why pointlessly continue the charade? Why didn’t they just let it lapse in Feb?

  4. thatbalddude says:

    Question: if a person is sued as a Doe in the first mass filing (identified only through their IP address) and that case is dismissed, does it count as one of the two strikes allowed? I would think it would count, if the Doe can go before the court and say, “He had my IP address and obviously my info and didn’t prosecute.” Knowing that most of us are laymen, I won’t hold anyone to a legal definition, but an opinion would be helpful.

  5. that anonymous coward says:

    The defendant was avoiding me, he wouldn’t magically appear in my office when I crossed my arms and wished to him appear and give me money. I have now hired someone else to cross their arms and wish him to appear….

  6. wait, was there a ninja here? says:

    Perhaps he can make some good of this by offering (for a small fee of course) Ninja-Hiding lessons for other does. lol

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