KLINEDINST PC 501 West BROADWAY, SUITE 600

Case 2:1?-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 108-4 Filed 04/08/13 Page1of4 Page ID #:2398

1 || Heather L. Rosing, Bar No. 183986 David M. Majchrzak, Bar No. 220860 2 || Philip W. Vineyard, Bar No. 233628 KLI EDINST PC 3 || 501 West Broadway, Suite 600 San Diego, California 92101 4 || (619) 239-8131/FAX (619) 238-8707 hrosing @klinedinstlaw.com 5 || dmajchrzak @klinedinstlaw.com pvineyar inedinstlaw.com 6 Speciall earing for 7 PAUL DUEEY, A GELA VAN DEN HEMEL, and PRENDA LAW, INC. 8 . UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT a a6 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 41 Z INGENUITY 13 LLC, Case No. 2:12-cv-8333-ODW(JCx) P 12 2 Plaintiff, REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE < 13 IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSE TO © V. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY a «14 SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE z JOHN DOE, LEVIED me 15 Defendant. Judge: Hon. Otis D. Wright, II 16 Magistrate Judge: Hon. Jacqueline Chooljian 17 Courtroom: 11 Date: April 2, 2013 18 Time: 16:00 A.M. 19 Complaint Filed: ye enn 27, 2012 Trial Date: None set 20 21 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201,

22 || Paul Duffy, Angela Van Den Hemel, and Prenda Law, Inc. hereby request that the 23 || court take judicial notice of the following documents in support of their response to 24 || the court’s order to show cause why sanctions should not be levied. All exhibit

25 || references correspond to the exhibits attached hereto.

26 Exhibit 1: Transcript from March 11, 2013 order to show cause hearing in oF this action. 28 | ///

ae ie REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED

KLINEDINST PC 501 West BROADWAY, SUITE 600

Case 2:1?-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 108-4 Filed 04/08/13 Page 2of4 Page ID #:2399

1 Exhibit 2: Notices of allegations filed in United States District Court, 2 Northern District of California, case no. 3:12-cv-02396; United 3 States District Court, Central District of Illinois, case no. 1:12- 4 cv-01258; United States District Court, Central District of 5 Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-01398; United States District Court, 6 Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-03567; United 7 States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. 8 1:12-cv-03568; United States District Court, Northern District 9 of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-03570; United States District Court, 3 10 Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-04232; United 2 11 States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. : 12 1:12-cv-04234; United States District Court, Northern District o 13 of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-04235; United States District Court, : 14 Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-04237; United a 15 States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. 16 1:12-cv-04239; United States District Court, Northern District 17 of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-04244; United States District Court, 18 Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-05075; United 19 States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. 20 1:12-cv-05077; United States District Court, Northern District 21 of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-08030; and United States Court of 22 Appeal for the District Court of Columbia Circuit, case no. 12- 23 1139, 24 Exhibit 3: Dismissals and/or motions for dismissals filed in United States 25 District Court, Northern District of California, case no. 3:12-cv- 26 02396; United States District Court, Central District of Illinois, 27 case no. 1:12-cv-01258; United States District Court, Central 28 District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-01398; United States

232 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED

KLINEDINST PC 501 West BROADWAY, SUITE 600

Case 2:1?-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 108-4 Filed 04/08/13 Page 3o0f4 Page ID #:2400

1 District Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv- 2 03567; United States District Court, Northern District of 3 Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-03568; United States District Court, 4 Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-03570; United 5 States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. 6 1:12-cv-04232; United States District Court, Northern District 7 of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-04234; United States District Court, 8 Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-04235; United 9 States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. 3 10 1:12-cv-04237; United States District Court, Northern District 2 11 of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-04239; United States District Court, : 12 Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-04244; United o 13 States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. : 14 1:12-cv-05075; United States District Court, Northern District a 15 of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-05077; and United States District 16 Court, Northern District of Illinois, case no. 1:12-cv-08030. 17 Exhibit 4: | Related Case Order filed in United States District Court, 18 Northern District of California, case no. 3:12-cv-04976-JSW, 19 entitled Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe. 20 Exhibit 5: Form CV-30.' Zh. Wed 22. Wdd de 23 Net 24 | /// 25 oe 4 26 || /// 27 |I 7

28 || http://court.cacd.uscourts.gov/CACD/forms.nsf/0/05 12227aaf19765e88256c1a005 e6748?OpenDocument oe REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED

KLINEDINST PC 501 West BROADWAY, SUITE 600

Case 2:12?-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 108-4 Filed 04/08/13 Page 4of4 Page ID #:2401

1 Duffy, Van Den Hemel, and Prenda also request that the court take judicial 2 || notice that Prenda Law, Inc. was incorporated on November 7, 2011. 3 || http://www.ilsos.gov/corporatellc/CorporateLlcController (enter “Prenda Law 4 || Inc.” in corporate search and select “submit’). 5 6 Klinedinst PC 7 8 || DATED: April 8. 2013 Bv: Tate 2 10 Specially Meee for -_ a o 12. || 19508701v1 5 43 i G15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2] 28

se REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED