Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 1of130 Page ID #:777
KAHIBIT P
EXHIBIT P Supplemental Exhibits - Page 1
Gmail - Case of W2nennOB3SCo@ARW-JC Document 53-1 Filedk@?/2AMdoeRaga/AAiulG hi-PawyeslrwdcBeview...
- (mse i Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com>
Notice of Withdrawal as Counsel
Brett Gibbs <bligibbs@wefightpiracy.com> Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:56 PM To: "Morgan E. Pietz" <mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com>
Mr. Pietz:
Please be on notice, | will be entering my notice of withdrawal as counsel of record for Ingenuity13 and AF Holdings in all cases filed in California. Mr. Paul Duffy will be substituting in as counsel.
Regards,
Brett L. Gibbs, Esq. (SBN 251000) Of Counsel to Prenda Law Inc.
38 Miller Avenue, #263
Mill Valley, CA 94941 415-325-5900 bleibbs@wefightpiracy.com
NOTICE: THIS EMAIL IS INTENDED TO BE PART OF A SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATION AND IS NOT ADMISSIBLE UNDER FRE RULE 408.
NOTICE:
This communication is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, found at 18 U.S.C. 2510 et. seq. and is intended to remain confidential and is subject to applicable attorney/client and/or work product privileges. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and all attachments. Do not deliver, distribute or copy this message and/or any attachments and if you are not the intended recipient, do not disclose the contents or take any action in reliance upon the information contained in this communication or any attachments.
Circular 230 Disclosure: Pursuant to recently-enacted U.S. Treasury Department regulations, we are now required to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this communication, including attachments and enclosures, is not intended or written to be used, and may not be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (1) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
1 of 1 2/20/13 12:29 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 2
Gmail - RASRyANArC\?-OBSBREBDUIHWGc PasuMENnt 53-1 FilesrO?/AAlldodRage AAW Mi-Pameslar Hi dCB&view...
- (Come : Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com> by LOO
Activity in Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Ingenuity13 LLC v. John Doe Order Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com> Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:36 AM
To: Prenda <paduffy@wefightpiracy.com> Cc: "Morgan E. Pietz" <mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com>, Brett Gibbs <blgibbs@wefightpiracy.com>
No luck reaching you.
Please send me your part of the joint letter on the PO issue in N.D. Cal. No. 12-4976 by close of business today. This nonsense has gone on long enough. Note that you do NOT have my permission to simply file the letter. You and Brett have now wasted so much time that circumstances have changed and | need to update my part.
| am tied up in Court the rest of the day. Have a nice weekend.
Best regards, Mirgan
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 8, 2013, at 11:31 AM, Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com> wrote:
Paul | just tried that number and it went straight to a 'voicemailbox that has not been setup yet.’ | am going to try again two more times, right now. Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 7, 2013, at 4:59 PM, Prenda <paduffy@wefightpiracy.com> wrote:
3128526136
On Feb 7, 2013, at 6:33 PM, Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com> wrote:
What number should | call?
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Prenda <paduffy@wefightpiracy.com> wrote: | am representing that | will participate in the conference call that you agreed to participate in tomorrow. If there is something substantive you would like to talk about then | am all ears. Thanks.
lof 8 2/20/13 12:33 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 3
Gmail - RLaSRyANIARe0-DBSZREBOUHWGC Magument 53-1 FilesO?/AAlaoARAaga/ hile MiPageslOrwdRGaview...
2 of 8
On Feb 7, 2013, at 5:14 PM, Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com> wrote:
Paul,
Since you seem to have an aversion to reading, I'll make this short then: are you representing that | should consider you as counsel of record in this case or not?
| do plan to speak with you tomorrow at 11:30, at the very least about some other cases, but whether we will be covering this case depends on your answer to my question above.
Best regards, Morgan
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Prenda <paduffy@wefightpiracy.com> wrote: | agreed to have a meet and confer with you tomorrow. If you are canceling please let me know and we can reschedule. Your email message (below) and your other messages are too long for me to read but | am happy to talk directly with you about whatever you want. Thanks.
On Feb 7, 2013, at 4:33 PM, Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com> wrote:
Brett and Paul,
| just noticed that the most recent email to me below appears to be from Paul Duffy not Brett Gibbs, who | understand has recently moved on to be the purported ‘in-house counsel' for assorted Prenda-related entities.
With respect to the case identified in the subject line, Mr. Gibbs is still counsel of record, and, as Mr. Gibbs himself correctly pointed out, no substitution has yet been filed making Paul Duffy counsel of record in this matter.
Accordingly, Paul, if you would like to have a substantive discussion on this case, and the impending threat of sanctions which neither you nor Brett have responded to, | must insist that you enter some kind of appearance first. However, | would indeed like to Keep our 11:30 a.m. PST phone appointment tomorrow, as | have a number of other matters, where you are properly counsel of record, which | would like to discuss with you.
| will send you separate emails about those other matters, so that we may have a more productive conversation tomorrow.
As to this matter, please advise whether | should be speaking to Mr. Duffy, to Mr. Gibbs, or to both/either of you?
Best regards, Morgan
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com> wrote: Yes, at 11:30 PST.
2/20/13 12:33 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 4
Gmail - RaSRyAnIARe0-DBSZREBOUHWGC Magument 53-1 FilesO?/2AlaodRaga/ AAG MiPagestwdRbaview...
sent from my iPhone
On Feb 6, 2013, at 3:05 AM, Prenda <paduffy@wefightpiracy.com> wrote:
Mr. Pietz - please let me know if you are free to meet and confer by telephone on Friday, February 8 at 9:am or later your time. Thanks.
On Jan 30, 2013, at 8:18 PM, "Morgan E. Pietz" <mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com> wrote:
Brett,
Since Mr. Duffy has not yet appeared in this case, and, as you correctly note, no substitution has been filed, much less approved, then, you are quite right: you are still counsel of record. You know as well as | do that this matter is not concluded; the Court has not yet approved your voluntary dismissal (the Copyright Report is not what matters) and the minute order below, as well as my prior notice to you that | am likely going to be seeking sanctions, clearly mean that litigation here is not quite over yet. As | am sure you know, a federal Court retains jurisdiction to consider sanctions, even after a complaint has been dismissed.
Accordingly, | am going to reiterate my request, one final time, for a response to my query of January 29, about whether you will be responding to the discovery on Alan Cooper in which the Court has taken an interest. Based on your most recent email, it does seem clear you are the appropriate (indeed, only) attorney to which it is appropriate to direct this question.
| am cc'ing Mr. Duffy, both as a courtesy, and in the hopes that if he does seek to substitute in on your behalf, you and/or he can first answer my other questions below
to allow me to determine whether | would oppose such a request.
Best regards, Morgan
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Brett Gibbs <blgibbs@wefightpiracy.com> wrote: Mr. Pietz:
This case has been dismissed, and recently closed by the Court. Please refer to the Court's docket.
As for any questions regarding Mr. Duffy, you can contact him yourself if you desire.
As for your statement directed at me, please note that there was no substitution of counsel form filed in the above-referenced case.
It was a pleasure working with you. Good luck in your future endeavors.
3 of 8 2/20/13 12:33 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 5
Gmail - RaSRyANIARe-DBSZEREBOUHWGC Magument 53-1 FilesO?/2AldodRaga/ AMG MiPageslwdRBaview...
4of 8
Regards,
Brett Gibbs
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Morgan E. Pietz <mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com> wrote: Brett,
| am in receipt of your email of yesterday night informing me that you plan on attempting to withdraw from this action, as well as the other AF Holdings and Ingenuity 13 actions in California, and that you hope that Mr. Paul Duffy will be allowed to substitute in on your behalf in these cases.
With respect to whether | will object to the proposed substitution in this case, could you please clarify a few things for me:
(1) It is almost now close of business, and | still have not heard back from you with respect to my query below. Have you forwarded my query to Mr. Duffy, and from whom, if anyone, should | expect a substantive response?
(2) | note that both on the California State Bar website, and in and recent filings made by Mr. Duffy in the Northern District of California yesterday and today, Mr. Duffy lists different addresses, both of which are located in Chicago, IL. | also note that a couple months ago, Mr. Duffy wrote Judge Scriven in Florida to explain that he could not travel by air to a hearing she had ordered him to appear at, due to eye surgery. Is Mr. Duffy able to travel by air now, such that he could be available to appear in California?
(3) | note that on both the State Bar website, and in Mr. Duffy's recent appearances in other cases, Mr. Duffy's affiliation is listed as something other than Prenda Law, Inc. My understanding was that Mr. Duffy was the "sole principal" of Prenda Law, Inc. and that you were "of counsel" to that firm. Has the firm been disbanded?
(4) Finally, | understand from other filings that you will now become "in house counsel" for AF Holdings. Is that correct? What about Ingenuity 13, are you now also "in house counsel" for Ingenuity 13, LLC.
Please get back to me on these issues so that | can determine whether | will oppose the proposed substitution.
Best regards, Morgan
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Morgan E. Pietz <mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com> wrote:
Brett,
2/20/13 12:33 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 6
Gmail - CLaSRyANIARe0-DBSZREBOUHWGC Magument 53-1 FiledO?/AA1ldodRAaga MAG MiPageslOwdRsaview...
| view your attempt to dodge the Alan Cooper discovery, by unilaterally dismissing the case without prejudice, as the coup de grace in a series of bad faith actions in this case. Please be advised, | will likely be seeking sanctions.
In view of the Court's order of earlier today, below, please advise whether you will be responding to the outstanding written discovery on Alan Cooper. If you actually respond with properly verified, substantive answers, and produce the documents demanded to my office, by the original deadline of Monday 2/4/13, by 5:00 P.M., | will consider refraining from seeking sanctions (depending on your responses).
Please advise by close of business tomorrow (1/30) whether you will be responding to the discovery by Monday (2/4).
Best regards, Morgan
naan a-n-=- Forwarded message ----------
From: <cacd_ecfmail@cacd.uscourts.gov>
Date: Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:19 AM
Subject: Activity in Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Ingenuity13 LLC v. John Doe Order
To: ecfnef@cacd.uscourts.gov
This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended.
***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered on 1/29/2013 at 11:18 AM PST and filed on 1/28/2013
Case Name: Ingenuity13 LLC v. John Doe Case Number: 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Filer: 5 of 8 2/20/13 12:33 AM
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 7
Gmail - CLaSRyANIARe0-DBSZREBOUHWGC Magument 53-1 FilesO?/2ALdaoARaga/ AAG AiPagestrwdRéeview...
Document Number: 45
Docket Text:
ORDER RE STATUS CONFERENCE by Judge Otis D. Wright, Il: The parties to jointly prepare a status report, briefly indicating whether this early discovery was propounded and whether an answer was given in response. This status report must be filed by February 19, 2013. In addition, the parties are hereby ORDERED to appear for a status conference on March 4, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., to discuss the status of this early discovery.If the parties indicate in their status report that the early discovery has been properly propounded and answered, the Court will vacate the March 4, 2013 status conference. Failure to comply with this order or failure to appear for the scheduled status conference may result in sanctions, including monetary sanctions.(Ic)
2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Notice has been electronically mailed to: Morgan E Pietz mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com, Irudolph@pietzlawfirm.com
Brett Langdon Gibbs docket@wefightpiracy.com, blgibbs@wefightpiracy.com
2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Notice has been delivered by First Class U. S. Mail or by other means BY THE FILER to:
Morgan E. Pietz
THE PIETZ LAW FIRM
3770 Highland Ave., Ste. 206 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com Ph: (310) 424-5557
Fx: (3810) 546-5301 www.pietzlawfirm.com
Morgan E. Pietz THE PIETZ LAW FIRM 3770 Highland Ave., Ste. 206
6 of 8 2/20/13 12:33 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 8
Gmail - CLaSRyAnIAre0-DBSZREBOUHWGC Ragument 53-1 FilesO?/AAldodRaga/ AAG AiPagestrwdRbaview...
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com Ph: (310) 424-5557
Fx: (810) 546-5301 www.pietzlawfirm.com
Brett L. Gibbs, Esq. (SBN 251000) Of Counsel to Prenda Law Inc.
38 Miller Avenue, #263
Mill Valley, CA 94941 415-325-5900 bleibbs@wefightpiracy.com
NOTICE: THIS EMAIL IS INTENDED TO BE PART OF A SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATION AND IS NOT ADMISSIBLE UNDER FRE RULE 408.
NOTICE:
This communication is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, found at 18 US.C. 2510 et. seq. and is intended to remain confidential and is subject to applicable attorney/client and/or work product privileges. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and all attachments. Do not deliver, distribute or copy this message and/or any attachments and if you ate not the intended recipient, do not disclose the contents or take any action in reliance upon the information contained in this communication or any attachments.
Circular 230 Disclosure: Pursuant to recently-enacted U.S. Treasury Department regulations, we are now required to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this communication, including attachments and enclosures, is not intended ot written to be used, and may not be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (it) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.
Morgan E. Pietz
THE PIETZ LAW FIRM
3770 Highland Ave., Ste. 206 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com Ph: (310) 424-5557
Fx: (310) 546-5301 www.pietzlawfirm.com
7 of 8 2/20/13 12:33 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 9
Gmail - Actas 2at2200-0803330DWAdGhedaaeument ras a FInd: Anda Obbale BaAgGRi/O/OfuBX ikPAage3bdocb&view...
8 of 8 2/20/13 12:33 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 10
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 11o0f130 Page ID #:787
AHIBIT
EXHIBIT Q Supplemental Exhibits - Page 11
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 12 o0f130 Page I/D #:/88
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Alan Cooper, (Court File No.:
Plaintiff v. Complaint
John Lawrence Steele, Prenda Law Inc., AF Holdings, LLC, Ingenuity13, LLC,
Defendants
Alan Cooper, for his Complaint states and alleges as follows: INTRODUCTION
Defendant John Steele and the law firm Prenda Law, Inc. have falsely used Plaintiff Alan Cooper’s name as an officer or director of two St. Kitts & Nevis based limited liability companies for the purpose of concealing the their true owners and to defraud others. All Defendants have worked together and used Plaintiff’s name in furtherance of their scheme to demand settlements relating to alleged copyright infringement from individuals across the nation. Plaintiff asks this court for damages and injunctive relief so that he can be compensated for unlawful use of his name and to prevent any further unlawful use.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Plaintiff is an individual residing in Mille Lacs County, Minnesota. 2. Defendant John Lawrence Steele is an individual residing in Cook County, IL. Steele’s tortious conduct described in this Complaint was directed at Minnesota and he has
knowingly caused the injuries described in this Complaint within Minnesota.
l
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 12
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 13 o0f130 Page I/D | #:789
Furthermore, he also owns land in Aitkin County, MN. Therefore he is subject to personal jurisdiction pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 543.19.
3. Defendant Prenda Law, Inc. is a corporation with principal offices in Chicago, Illinois. Prenda has directed its tortious activities described in this Complaint towards individuals residing in the State of Minnesota and otherwise directed its business activities within the State of Minnesota including filing lawsuits within the State and sending settlement demands to residents of Minnesota.
4. Defendant Prenda Law, Inc. has at various times operated under the names “Steele Hansmeier, PLLC” and “Anti Piracy Law Group” but these entities are either identical, alter-ego identities, or are successor or predecessor firms. All of these law firms have the same principals, business model, and clients.
5. Defendant AF Holdings, LLC is a Nevis based limited liability company and has brought several lawsuits in the State of Minnesota fraudulently using Plaintiff's name as an officer or director. AF Holdings, LLC’s conduct directed at Minnesota subjects it to personal jurisdiction within the state because this lawsuits arises out of its activities within Minnesota.
6. Defendant Ingenuity13, LLC is a Nevis based limited liability company and has brought several lawsuits in the State of Minnesota fraudulently using Plaintiff’s name as an officer or director. Ingenuity13, LLC’s conduct directed at Minnesota subjects it to personal jurisdiction within the state because this lawsuits arises out of its activities within Minnesota.
7. Venue is appropriate in Hennepin County because the tortious acts occurred in part within Hennepin County, including the use of Alan Cooper’s name, by Defendants
and for the benefit of Defendants in lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the
2
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 13
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 14o0f130 Page ID #:/90
10.
11.
15.
16.
lig 2
18.
District of Minnesota, located in Hennepin County.
FACTS Plaintiff had been hired in 2006 as a caretaker for a property Steele owns in Aitkin County. Plaintiff was allowed to stay in a guest house on the property and helped with remodeling and general maintenance of the property. While visiting his property, Steele had on several occasions discussed his plans and early successes in carrying out a massive, nationwide copyright enforcement litigation strategy. Steele had also told Plaintiff that if anyone asked about any companies, that Plaintiff
was not to answer and to call Steele directly.
. Plaintiff confronted Steele, but was unable to determine what companies Steele was
talking about.
. Steele has in fact sued tens of thousands of individuals for copyright infringement
nationwide.
. Plaintiff has not participated in any part of Steele’s litigation activities.
Steele and his law firm, Steele Hansmeier, PLLC, now known as Prenda Law, Inc. have gained significant attention due to the scope of their litigation.
Steele claims that he is merely “of counsel” with Prenda Law, Inc., but in fact controls operations at Prenda Law, Inc.
Sometime in November 2012, Plaintiff was informed that his name was being used as an officer or director of AF Holdings, LLC, a client of Prenda Law, Inc.
In various lawsuits filed in the past year, AF Holdings, LLC through its counsel has
filed copies of copyright assignment agreements that bear the signature of an “Alan
3
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 14
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 15o0f130 Page I/D #:791
Cooper” signing on behalf of AF Holdings, LLC.
19. A copy of one such assignment is attached as Exhibit A to this Complaint.
20).
21.
ZZ.
23:
24.
Zz).
26.
27.
28.
ZY.
30.
31.
The signature of “Alan Cooper” in Exhibit A was not made by Plaintiff.
On at least one occasion, an “Alan Cooper” has acted as the manager of another client of Prenda Law, Ingenuity13, LLC.
A copy of one such document is attached as Exhibit B to this Complaint.
Again, Plaintiff did not sign the document shown as Exhibit B.
As described above, Steele and Plaintiff entered into an agreement for Cooper to care for Steele’s property, a copy of that agreement is attached as Exhibit C.
Steele and the other Defendants used the signature in Exhibit C or another of Plaintiff’s signatures as the model for creating the signature that appears on Exhibit A. AF Holdings, LLC has filed over 200 copyright lawsuits in federal district courts across the nation within the past year.
Ingenuity13, LLC has filed over 50 copyright lawsuits in federal district courts across the nation within the past year.
All Defendants knew that Plaintiff’s name was being used, without Plaintiff's knowledge, as an officer, director, or shareholder of both AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC.
All Defendants intended to use Alan Cooper’s name for their own benefit on AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC documents.
All Defendants have in fact benefited from using Plaintiff’s name for their own benefit on AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC documents.
Defendants knew that Alan Cooper had not authorized the use of his name or
signature on AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC documents. 4
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 15
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 16of130 Page I/D #:/92
on:
33.
34,
a:
36.
37.
38.
39:
40.
4
—
Both Steele and Prenda Law, Inc. participated in the creation of AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC.
Defendants Steele and Prenda Law have actual control of Defendants AF Holdings LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC.
AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC exist solely as instruments of Steele and Prenda Law, Inc.
Both Steele and Prenda Law, Inc. chose'to organize AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC in the nation of St. Kitts & Nevis because of the strict corporate privacy laws in that country.
Plaintiff’s counsel made several attempts to contact Defendants about the use of the name “Alan Cooper” in lawsuits by AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC. Defendant Steele, when he heard that Prenda Law, Inc. had been contacted by Plaintiff’s counsel did not respond to Plaintiff’s counsel but rather called Plaintiff several times within a matter of minutes.
Despite repeated requests by Plaintiff’s counsel, Defendants have not offered any explanation as to why Alan Cooper’s name appears on documents relating to lawsuits filed by AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC.
Plaintiff through his counsel filed the letter attached as Exhibit D in cases filed by AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC in the District of Minnesota.
Defendants have claimed that the letter is “false” but have never attempted to explain
what in particular about the allegations contained within that letter are false.
. Defendants have never identified another person by the name of Alan Cooper who
could plausibly have signed the documents shown as Exhibit A or Exhibit B.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 16
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 17 of130 Page ID #:/93
42.
43.
44,
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
OMe
COUNT I INVASION OF PRIVACY - APPROPRIATION
Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above as if fully set forth below. Defendants have appropriated Plaintiff’s name for their own benefit. Defendants did not have Plaintiff’s permission to use his name to sign documents on behalf of AF Holdings, LLC or Ingenuity13, LLC Defendants knew that the did not have Plaintiff’s permission to use his name to sign documents on behalf of AF Holdings, LLC or Ingenuity13, LLC Defendants intended to benefit and in fact did benefit by using Alan Cooper’s name for corporate documents to conceal the true identities of officers, directors, and shareholders of AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC.
COUNT II
VIOLATION OF MINN. STAT. § 325D.44
Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above as if fully set forth below. Defendants, working in concert, have engaged in the following deceptive trade practices prohibited by Minn. Stat. § 325D.44. By using Plaintiff’s name as if he had signed documents on their behalf, Defendants have caused a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services. Plaintiff is not the source of any of Defendants’ goods or services and has never sponsored, approved or certified any of Defendants’ goods or services. By using Plaintiff’s name in connection with documents signed on behalf of AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC, Defendants have caused a likelihood of
confusion or of misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection, or association with, or
6
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 17
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 18o0f130 Page I/D #:794
52.
53.
54.
>): 56.
ee
58.
59.
60.
61. 62.
certification by, another, namely Alan Cooper. Plaintiff has no affiliation, connection, or association with Defendants and has never certified Defendants or their actions. By filing documents in court, bearing Plaintiff’s name, Defendant Prenda Law, Inc. has created the false appearance of affiliation, connection, association, or certification of Defendants’ activities Defendants actions, taken as a whole, create a likelihood that there would be confusion or misunderstanding relating to whether Alan Cooper was involved in any way with Defendants and their business activities. COUNT Il CIVIL CONSPIRACY Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above as if fully set forth below All Defendants have entered an agreement to use Plaintiff’s name as if he were an officer or director of Defendants AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC. The use of Plaintiff’s name in this manner is both unlawful and tortious. By entering into this agreement, all Defendants have conspired to commit tortious acts as described within this Complaint. Plaintiff has been damaged by these unlawful and tortious acts. Each Defendant must therefore be held liable for any tortious act committed by any other Defendant. COUNT III ALTER EGO - PIERCING CORPORATE VEIL - AF HOLDINGS, LLC Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above as if fully set forth below.
AF Holdings, LLC is not a properly organized limited liability corporation.
7
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 18
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 19 of130 Page I/D #:/95
63.
64.
65.
66. 67.
68.
69.
70.
7
==,
pe
73;
74,
qd.
Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC is a mere instrumentality of Steele and Prenda Law, Inc.
AF Holdings, LLC has never had an officer or director named Alan Cooper who signed the document shown as Exhibit A.
Upon information and belief, either Steele or someone working at his request signed the document as “Alan Cooper” shown as Exhibit A.
Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC has no true officers or directors. Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC has fraudulently used Plaintiff’s name and thereby used the LLC to perpetrate a fraud.
Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC is and at all times was insufficiently capitalized for purposes of corporate undertaking.
Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC observed little or no corporate formalities.
Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC was insolvent or non-existent at time of the copyright assignment in question and throughout 2012 when it initiated
numerous lawsuits.
. Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC's funds, to the extent it had any, were
used solely for the benefit of the dominant members.
Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC did not have functioning officers or directors other than its attorneys including Defendant John Steele.
Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC has little or no corporate records. Upon information and belief, AF Holdings, LLC’s existence was a mere facade for individual dealings of its dominant members.
For the reasons above, AF Holdings, LLC’s owners or members must be liable for AF
8
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 19
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 20 of 130 Page ID #:/96
76. Ti:
78.
79.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
Holdings, LLC’s actions. COUNT IV
ALTER EGO - PIERCING CORPORATE VEIL - INGENUITY13, LLC Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above as if fully set forth below. Ingenuity13, LLC is not a properly organized limited liability corporation. Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC is a mere instrumentality of Steele and Prenda Law, Inc. Ingenuity13, LLC has never had an officer or director named Alan Cooper who could
have signed the document shown as Exhibit B.
. Defendant Prenda Law, Inc. is obligated to retain the original signed version of the
document shown as Exhibit B.
Plaintiffs counsel has requested to see or to be provided with a copy of the original signed version of the document shown as Exhibit B.
Defendants have not produced for Plaintiffs counsel copies of the signed version of the document shown as Exhibit B.
Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC has no true officers or directors. Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC has fraudulently used Plaintiff’s name and thereby used the LLC to perpetrate a fraud.
Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC is and at all times was insufficiently capitalized for purposes of corporate undertaking.
Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC observed little or no corporate formalities.
Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC was insolvent or non-existent at time
of the copyright assignment in question and throughout 2012 when it initiated
9
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 20
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 21 0f130 Page I/D #:797
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93. 94.
oO:
96.
97.
98.
99.
numerous lawsuits. Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC's funds, to the extent it had any, were used solely for the benefit of the dominant members. Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC did not have functioning officers or directors other than its attorneys including Defendant John Steele. Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC has little or no corporate records. Upon information and belief, Ingenuity13, LLC’s existence was a mere facade for individual dealings of its dominant members. For the reasons above, Ingenuity13, LLC’s owners or members must be liable for Ingenuity13, LLC’s actions. COUNT V
ALTER EGO - PIERCING CORPORATE VEIL - PRENDA LAW, INC. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the above as if fully set forth below. Prenda Law, Inc. was an Illinois based corporation engaged in the practice of law. Prenda Law, Inc. was not properly organized as a professional services corporation under Illinois law, as required of law firms organized as corporations. Prenda Law, Inc. did not file an annual renewal due in late 2012. Despite having not filed an annual renewal, Prenda Law, Inc. continued to provide legal services including litigating cases on behalf of AF Holdings, LLC and Ingenuity13, LLC which made use of documents purportedly signed by Plaintiff. Upon information and belief, Prenda Law, Inc. is a mere instrumentality of Steele. Upon information and belief, officers of Prenda Law, Inc. have fraudulently used
Plaintiff's name and thereby used the corporation to perpetrate a fraud.
100.Upon information and belief, Prenda Law, Inc. is and at all times was insufficiently
10
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 21
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 22 of 130 Page I/D #:/98
capitalized for purposes of corporate undertaking.
101. Upon information and belief, Prenda Law, Inc. observed little or no corporate formalities.
102.Upon information and belief, Prenda Law, Inc. was insolvent or non-existent at time of transaction in question.
103.Upon information and belief, Prenda Law, Inc.'s funds, to the extent it had any, were used solely for the benefit of the dominant shareholder.
104.Upon information and belief, Prenda Law, Inc. has little or no corporate records.
105.Upon information and belief, Prenda Law, Inc. was controlled by individuals other than its shareholders.
106.Upon information and belief, Prenda Law, Inc.’s existence was a mere facade for individual dealings of Steele.
107.For the reasons above, Prenda Law, Inc.’s owners or shareholders must be liable for
it’s actions.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Alan Cooper prays for judgment of the Court against the
Defendants for the following relief:
i; Monetary damages against all parties; 2. Reasonable costs and disbursements; 3. Injunctive relief, including, an order forbidding the further use of Plaintiff Alan
Cooper’s name in connection with any of Defendants’ activities; 4, Declarative relief, including, a determination that Plaintiff never acted signed documents on behalf of AF Holdings, LLC or Ingenuity13, LLC and has never
been an officer or director of AF Holdings, LLC or Ingenuity13, LLC; 1]
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 22
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 23 of 130 Page ID #:/99
>, Leave of the Court to amend this Complaint to add a claim for punitive damages;
6. For such other relief as the Court determines to be fair and equitable.
Dated: January 23, 2013 GODFREAD LAW FIRM, PC
Paul Godfread (389316)
100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1900 Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 284-7325
Attorney for Plaintiff, Alan Cooper
ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements, and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 549.211,
subd. 2, to the party against whom the allegations in this pleading are asserted.
Dated: January 22, 2013 GODFREAD LAW FIRM, PC
7. IAL
Paul Godfread (389316)
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 23
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 24 o0f130 Page ID #:800
KAHIBIT R
EXHIBIT R Supplemental Exhibits - Page 24
Case 2:12-Uc#S3320DW2506-BhbOmBuchRéntBileadleAOOAG1PaBaghlaifiBO Page ID 801
1 || Brett L. Gibbs, Esq. (SBN 251000) Of Counsel to Prenda Law Inc.
2 ||38 Miller Avenue, #263 Mill Valley, CA 94941 3 || 415-325-5900 blgibbs@wefightpiracy.com Attorney for Plaintiff 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 7 g NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 10 11 AF HOLDINGS LLC, ) No. 3:12-cv-02396 EMC 12 ) Plaintiff, ) ADR CERTIFICATION BY PARTIES 13 V. ) AND COUNSEL ) 14 || JOHN DOE, ) ) 15 Defendant. ) ) 16 ) 17 ADR CERTIFICATION BY PARTIES AND COUNSEL 18 19 Pursuant to Civil L.R. 16-8(b) and ADR L.R. 3-5(b), each of the undersigned certifies that he 20 || or she has: = (1) Read the handbook entitled “Dispute Resolution Procedures in the Northern District of 72 California’ on the Court’s ADR Internet site www.adr.cand.uscourts.gov (Limited printed copies are available from the clerk’s office for parties in cases not subject to the 23 court's Electronic Case Filing program (ECF) under General Order 45); (2) Discussed the available dispute options provided by the Court and private entities; and 24 (3) Considered whether this case might benefit from any available dispute resolution options. 25 6 Dated: July 20, 2012 __/s/ Salt Marsh, AF Holdings Owner PARTY 2) 9g || Dated: July 20, 2012 ___/s/ Brett L. Gibbs, Esq., Trial Counsel COUNSEL
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 25
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 26 of 130 Page ID #:802
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT S$ Supplemental Exhibits - Page 26
Case 2:12@as@8383-0M)4696-EDiicuMeot bith Sled Wao2!31/Pag® agaif 484 Page ID #:803
Nicholas Ranallo, Attorney at Law #275016 371 Dogwood Way
Boulder Creek, CA 95006
Telephone No.: (831) 703 - 4011
Fax No.: (831) 533-5073
Email: nick @ranallolawoffice.com Attorney for Defendant Joe Navasca
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
AF HOLDINGS, LLC., Case No. 3:12-cv-02396-EMC
Plaintiff, Declaration of Nicholas Ranallo in V. Opposition to Motion to Shorten
Time/Motion for Stay of Discovery JOE NAVASCA
Defendants.
DECLARATION OF NICHOLAS RANALLO 1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice in the State of California and before the District Court for the Northern District of California. I am attorney of record for Joe Navasca, and this declaration is based on personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein or, to the extent so identified, upon information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry as described herein. 2. On Friday, February 8, 2013, I received an electronic file from Joe Navasca
comprised of a voicemail recording left at his residence on the same date.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 27
Case 2:12@as@838B3-0M)AG96-EDicuMenot bith HledHa0?r131/Page age 484 Page ID #:804 Paragraph 5, below, represents my personal transcription of the voicemail message. I have retained an electronic copy of the message and can provide it to the court upon request.
3. Upon information and belief, the individual speaking in the voicemail message 1s Mark Lutz. This belief is based on my recognition of Mr. Lutz’ voice from numerous past conversations with Mr. Lutz in his role as paralegal for Steele Hansmeier/Prenda Law.
4. On Friday, February 8, 2013, I sent a copy of the voicemail to Brett Gibbs requesting explanation. Beyond noting that I did not represent Jovino, Mr. Gibbs provided no information regarding why a law firm that is not formally involved in this case 1s seeking settlement from an individual that is not the defendant in this case, and/or seeking to amend the complaint to name an individual that was previously “eliminated” as a likely infringer.
>. The following represents my personal transcription of the February 8 voicemail. I
have endeavored to be as accurate as possible: “Yes, uh, this message is for Jovino. It’s, uh, Anti-Piracy Law Group giving you a call about a couple of letters we mailed you which had to do with the copyright infringement lawsuit that you are a part of. And..um..yeah, I mean, we haven’t entered into a settlement agreement as of yet. And, prior to moving forward and modifying the complaint to add your name, our client just asked us to give you a quick call. You know, I suppose if you want to avoid the expense and time that 1s associated with a case like this, call us back. We can be reached at (800) 380- 0840. Your reference number is 84080. Thank you.”
6. The telephone number identified in the message above is the number listed for
Prenda Law, Inc., on its wefightpiracy.com web site.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 28
Case a ane ne aE ene 484 Page ID
i The reference number noted above corresponds to prior letters from Plaintiff regarding the allegations of infringement from this case.
SALT MARSH
8. “Salt Marsh” is the individual identified as an “Owner” of AF Holdings in ECF No. 8 in this case, as well as numerous other cases in this district.
9. I am not aware of any individual with the actual name “Salt Marsh” that is associated with AF Holdings or John Steele.
10. | However, upon information and belief, an individual named Tony or Anthony Saltmarsh does exist, and has documented associations with John Steele’s family and the mysterious Alan Cooper, as described further herein.
11. | Upon information and belief, Tony Saltmarsh previously lived at 4532 E. Villa Theresa Drive in Phoenix Arizona, 85032. This belief 1s based upon a “past address” search through peoplesmart.com. of the address and Mr. Saltmarsh. A copy of Mr. Saltmarsh’s full report 1s annexed hereto as Exhibit B.
12. | Upon information and belief, Jayme Steele also previously lived at 4532 E. Villa Theresa Drive in Phoenix, Arizona. This belief is likewise based on peoplesmart.com “past address” search for Ms. Steele. A copy of this report 1s annexed hereto as Exhibit C.
13. Upon information and belief, the 4532 E. Villa Theresa address was also previously used by VPR, Inc., a former Steele Hansmeier client. This belief is based on a review of the Nevada Secretary of State entity details attached hereto as
Exhibit D.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 29
Case 2:12@as@838B3-0M)AG96-EDidcuMeot bith FledHa0?13B1/Pag® 8geef 484 Page ID #:806 14. Upon information and belief, Alan Cooper was identified as, inter alia, the President and Treasurer of VPR, Inc. and likewise associated with the 4532 East Villa Theresa address. This belief is likewise based on a review of the Nevada
Secretary of State entity details, a copy of which are annexed hereto as Exhibit D. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Declaration is executed on this 11" day of
February, 2013, in Boulder Creek, California.
/s/ Nicholas R. Ranallo Nicholas Ranallo
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 30
Case 2:17-a¢R223c0 D2S9K5E DWGcun tent bent 5-tecH0e dna MS /1RBagectje bficka@ Page ID #:807
Exhibit A
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 31
Odab2 2t 7B eO8R3220DU"SEiC MDCouneahtBeriStee ALMA MP AB feck? & fA cA Age: 600 #:808
ay
So Wo NY WB AHA Ee WW WN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
INGENUITY 13 LLC, Case Nos. 2:12-cv-8333-ODW(JCx)
Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE
V. SANCTIONS FOR RULE 11 AND LOCAL RULE 83-3 VIOLATIONS
JOHN DOE,
Defendant.
The Court hereby orders Brett L. Gibbs, attorney of record for AF Holdings LLC and Ingenuity 13 LLC, to appear on March 11, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., to justify his violations of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and Local Rule 83-3 discussed herein. A. Legal Standard
The Court has a duty to supervise the conduct of attorneys appearing before it. Erickson v. Newmar Corp., 87 F.3d 298, 301 (9th Cir. 1996). The power to punish contempt and to coerce compliance with issued orders is based on statutes and the Court’s inherent authority. Int’] Union, United Mine Workers of Am. v. Bagwell, 512 ' The violations discussed herein were committed in the following related cases: AF Holdings LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6636-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 1, 2012); AF Holdings LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6669-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012); Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv- 6662-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012); Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6668- ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012); Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-8333-ODW(JCx)
(C.D. Cal. filed Sept. 27, 2012). To facilitate this matter, Mr. Gibbs will be given the opportunity to address these violations together in one hearing rather than in several separate hearings.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 32
Odab22t?BaGGR322ODUNEHic DCo niet Be ied AE MELND/IP AB Gach 8 foFBa2 cA Bue: 60 1 #:809
ay
So WO NY Wo A He WW WN
U.S. 821, 831 (1994). And though this power must be exercised with restraint, the Court has wide latitude in fashioning appropriate sanctions to fit the conduct. See Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, 764—65 (1980). B. Rule 11(b)(3) Violations
By presenting a pleading to the Court, an attorney certifies that—after conducting a reasonable inquiry—the factual contentions in the pleading have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary Support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(3). This precomplaint duty to find supporting facts is “not satisfied by rumor or hunch.” Bankers Trust Co. v. Old Republic Ins. Co., 959 F.2d 677, 683 (7th Cir. 1992). The reasonableness of this inquiry 1s based on an objective standard, and subjective good faith provides no safe harbor. Golden Eagle Distrib. Corp. v. Burroughs Corp., 801 F.2d 1531, 1538 (9th Cir. 1986); F.D..C. v. Calhoun, 34 F.3d 1291, 1296 (Sth Cir. 1994); Knipe v. Skinner, 19 F.3d 72, 75 (2d Cir. 1994). The Court wields the discretion to impose sanctions designed to “deter repetition of the conduct or comparable conduct by others similarly situated.” Fed R. Civ. P 11(c)(4).
In Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6662-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), the Court ordered Plaintiff on December 20, 2012, to show cause why it failed to timely serve the Defendant or, if the Defendant has already been served, to submit the proof of service. (ECF No. 12.) In response, Plaintiff noted that the delay was because it waited to receive a response from the subscriber of the IP address associated with the alleged act of infringement. (ECF No. 14.) Plaintiff further noted: “Though the subscriber, David Wagar, remained silent, Plaintiff's investigation of his household established that Benjamin Wagar was the likely infringer of Plaintiff’s copyright.” (ECF No. 14, at 2.) Based on this investigation, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, substituting Benjamin Wagar for John Doe. (ECF No. 13.)
Plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleges the following in connection with
Benjamin Wagar:
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 33
Odabe2t 27 paisR3233D0NR2h: Aico dient Be Abed GEE MP dba GP atyt 4 (cFaGz eH Boe: 6D 2 #:810
ay
So Wo NY WB AHA Ee WW WN
“Defendant Benjamin Wagar (‘Defendant’) knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed Plaintiff's copyrighted Video by acting in concert with others via the BitTorrent file sharing protocol and, upon information and belief, continues to do the same.” (AC 4 1);
“Defendant is an individual who, upon information and belief, 1s over the age of eighteen and resides in this District.” (AC 4 4);
“Defendant was assigned the Internet Protocol (‘IP’) address of 96.248.225.171 on 2012-06-28 at 07:19:47 (UTC).” (AC ¥ 4); “Defendant, using IP address 96.248.225.171, without Plaintiff's authorization or license, intentionally downloaded a torrent file particular to Plaintiff's Video, purposefully loaded that torrent file into his BitTorrent client—in this case, Azureus 4.7.0.2—entered a BitTorrent swarm particular to Plaintiff's Video, and reproduced and distributed the Video to numerous third parties.” (AC § 22);
“Plaintiff's investigators detected Defendant’s illegal download on 2012- 06-28 at 07:19:47 (UTC). However, this is a [sic] simply a snapshot observation of when the IP address was observed in the BitTorrent swarm; the conduct took itself [sic] place before and after this date and time.” (AC § 23);
“The unique hash value in this case is_ identified as F016490BD8E60E184ECS5B7052CEBIFAS70A4AF11.” (AC § 24.)
In a different case, Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6668-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), Plaintiff essentially makes the same response to the Court’s December 20, 2012 Order To Show Cause (ECF No. 12): “Though the subscriber, Marvin Denton, remained silent, Plaintiff's investigation of his household established that Mayon Denton was the likely infringer of Plaintiff's copyright.” (ECF No. 13, at 2.) And based on this information, Plaintiff filed an Amended
Complaint (ECF No. 16), similar in all respects to the one filed against Benjamin
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 34
Odab2 2t 2B eOGR3220DU"S EEC MDaCouneahtBeriSted EMAL MP AB GP att 6 fo cA AGH: 603 #:811
Wagar in Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6662-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), with the following technical exceptions: e “Defendant was assigned the Internet Protocol (‘IP’) address of 75.128.55.44 on 2012-07-04 at 07:51:30 (UTC).” (AC ¥ 4); e “Defendant . . . purposefully loaded that torrent file into his BitTorrent client—in this case, uTorrent 3.1.3....” (AC § 22); e “The unique hash value in_ this case’ is _ identified as 0D47A7A035591BOBA4FASCB86AFE986885FSEI8E.” (AC ¥ 24.)
Upon review of these allegations, the Court finds two glaring problems that Plaintiff's technical cloak fails to mask. Both of these are obvious to an objective observer having a working understanding of the underlying technology.
1. Lack of reasonable investigation of copyright infringement activity
The first problem is how Plaintiff concluded that the Defendants actually downloaded the entire copyrighted video, when all Plaintiff has as evidence is a “snapshot observation.” (AC § 23.) This snapshot allegedly shows that the Defendants were downloading the copyrighted work—at least at that moment in time. But downloading a large file like a video takes time; and depending on a user’s Internet-connection speed, it may take a long time. In fact, 1t may take so long that the user may have terminated the download. The user may have also terminated the download for other reasons. To allege copyright infringement based on an IP snapshot is akin to alleging theft based on a single surveillance camera shot: a photo of a child reaching for candy from a display does not automatically mean he stole it. No Court would allow a lawsuit to be filed based on that amount of evidence.
What is more, downloading data via the Bittorrent protocol is not like stealing candy. Stealing a piece of a chocolate bar, however small, is still theft; but copying an encrypted, unusable piece of a video file via the Bittorrent protocol may not be copyright infringement. In the former case, some chocolate was taken; in the latter
case, an encrypted, unusable chunk of zeroes and ones. And as part of its prima facie
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 35
Odape 2t 27 paisR3233DOwesE: Aico nian tbe nb ed GE MEHO DP dee Ge att 6 foFaky eR Boe: 6D 4 #:812
ay
So Wo NY WB A Ee WW WN
copyright claim, Plaintiff must show that Defendants copied the copyrighted work. Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340, 361 (1991). Ifa download was not completed, Plaintiff’s lawsuit may be deemed frivolous.
In this case, Plaintiff’s reliance on snapshot evidence to establish its copyright infringement claims is misplaced. A reasonable investigation should include evidence showing that Defendants downloaded the entire copyrighted work—or at least a usable portion of a copyrighted work. Plaintiff has none of this—no evidence that Defendants completed their download, and no evidence that what they downloaded 1s a substantially similar copy of the copyrighted work. Thus, Plaintiff's attorney violated Rule 11(b)(3) for filing a pleading that lacks factual foundation.
Z Lack of reasonable investigation of actual infringer’s identity
The second problem is more troublesome. Here, Plaintiff concluded that Benjamin Wagar is the person who illegally downloaded the copyrighted video. But Plaintiff fails to allege facts in the Amended Complaint to show how Benjamin Wagar is the infringer, other than noting his IP address, the name of his Bittorrent client, and the alleged time of download.” Plaintiff’s December 27, 2012 Response to the Court’s Order to Show Cause re Lack of Service sheds some light:
Though the subscriber, David Wagar, remained silent, Plaintiffs investigation of his household established that Benjamin Wagar was the likely infringer of Plaintiff's copyright. As such, Plaintiff mailed its Amended Complaint to the Court naming Benjamin Wagar as the Defendant in this action. (ECF No. 14, at 2.)
The disconnect is how Plaintiff arrived at this conclusion—that the actual infringer 1s a member of the subscriber’s household (and not the subscriber himself or anyone else)—when all it had was an IP address, the name of the Bittorrent client used, the
alleged time of download, and an unresponsive subscriber.
* This analysis similarly applies in Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6668-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), where Plaintiff fails to allege sufficient facts to show how Mayon Denton 1s the infringer.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 36
Odab2 2t Bs eOGR 32 20DUNSEiC MDCouneahtBerbted ALMA MP AB deatiA 8 foFKR cA AGH: 605
#:813
Plaintiff's December 27, 2012 Discovery Status Report gives additional insight into Plaintiff's deductive process:
In cases where the subscriber remains silent, Plaintiff conducts investigations to determine the likelihood that the subscriber, or someone in his or her household, was the actual infringer. . . . For example, if the subscriber is 75 years old, or the subscriber 1s female, it is statistically quite unlikely that the subscriber was the infringer. In such cases, Plaintiff performs an investigation into the subscriber’s household to determine if there is a likely infringer of Plaintiff's copyright. .. . Plaintiff bases its choices regarding whom to name as the infringer on factual analysis. (ECF No. 15, at 24.)
The Court interprets this to mean: if the subscriber is 75 years old or female, then Plaintiff looks to see if there is a pubescent male in the house; and if so, he is named as the defendant. Plaintiffs “factual analysis” cannot be characterized as anything more than a hunch.
Other than invoking undocumented statistics, Plaintiff provides nothing to indicate that Benjamin Wagar is the infringer. While it is plausible that Benjamin Wagar is the infringer, Plaintiff’s deduction falls short of the reasonableness standard required by Rule 11.
For instance, Plaintiff cannot show that Benjamin 1s the infringer instead of someone else, such as: David Wagar; other members of the household; family guests; or, the next door neighbor who may be leeching from the Wagars’ Internet access. Thus, Plaintiff acted recklessly by naming Benjamin Wagar as the infringer based on its haphazard and incomplete investigation.
Further, the Court is not convinced that there is no solution to the problem of identifying the actual infringer. Here, since Plaintiff has the identity of the subscriber, Plaintiff can find the subscriber’s home address and determine (by driving up and scanning the airwaves) whether the subscriber, (1) has W1-F1, and (2) has password- protected his W1-F1 access, thereby reducing the likelihood that an unauthorized user
outside the subscriber’s home is the infringer. In addition, since Plaintiff 1s tracking a
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 37
Odab2 2t 2B eOGR 32 20DUNSEiC MDCouneahtBerSted ALMA MP AB Jedi 8 fF cA Age: 606
5S wo NY WB A Fe WO NO Ke
PF NO wo NO WN HNO WN YN NO Fe Fe HF KF FF FP OF FSF Ee oOo NN WO AW Be WwW NO KF OD UO oOo NY Wao Nan Be WO NO KF OS
#:814
number of related copyrighted videos, Plaintiff can compile its tracking data to determine whether other copyrighted videos were downloaded under the same IP address. This may suggest that the infringer is likely a resident of the subscriber’s home and not a guest. And an old-fashioned stakeout may be in order: the presence of persons within the subscriber’s home may be correlated with tracking data—the determination of who would have been in the subscriber’s home when the download was initiated may assist in discovering the actual infringer.
Such an investigation may not be perfect, but it narrows down the possible infringers and is better than the Plaintiff's current investigation, which the Court finds involves nothing more than blindly picking a male resident from a subscriber’s home. But this type of investigation requires time and effort, something that would destroy Plaintiff’?s business model.
The Court has previously expressed concern that in pornographic copyright infringement lawsuits like these, the economics of the situation makes it highly likely for the accused to immediately pay a settlement demand. Even for the innocent, a four-digit settlement makes economic sense over fighting the lawsuit in court—not to mention the benefits of preventing public disclosure (by being named in a lawsuit) of allegedly downloading pornographic videos.
And copyright lawsuits brought by private parties for damages are different than criminal investigations of cybercrimes, which sometimes require identification of an individual through an IP address. In these criminal investigations, a court has some guarantee from law enforcement that they will bring a case only when they actually have a case and have confidently identified a suspect. In civil lawsuits, no such guarantees are given. So, when viewed with a court’s duty to serve the public interest, a plaintiff cannot be given free rein to sue anyone they wish—the plaintiff has to actually show facts supporting its allegations. ee ///
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 38
Odab22t ?BeGSR 2220 DUN EHEc MaConnrEht Bend AE ENA AB Get © fA cA Agi: 6D7 #:815
C. Local Rule 83-3 Violations
Under Local Rule 83-3, the Court possesses the power to sanction attorney misconduct, including: disposing of the matter; referring the matter to the Standing Committee on Discipline; or taking “any action the Court deems appropriate.” L.R. 83-3.1. This includes the power to fine and imprison for contempt of the Court’s authority, for: (1) misbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice; (2) misbehavior of any of its officers in their official transactions; or, (3) disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command. 18 U.S.C. § 401.
The Court is concerned with three instances of attorney misconduct. The first and second instances are related and concern violating the Court’s discovery order. The third instance concerns possible fraud upon the Court.
le Failure to comply with the Court’s discovery order
In AF Holdings LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6636-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 1, 2012) and AF Holdings LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6669-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), the Court ordered Plaintiff to “cease its discovery efforts relating to or based on information obtained through any abovementioned Rule 45 subpoenas.” (ECF No. 13, at 1; ECF No. 10, at 1.) Further, Plaintiff was required to name all persons that were identified through any Rule 45 subpoenas. (/d.)
Plaintiff responded on November 1, 2012, and indicated that it did not obtain any information about the subscribers in both of these cases. (ECF No. 10, at 6—7, 10.) But in response to the Court’s subsequent Orders to Show Cause, Plaintiff not only named the subscribers, but recounted its efforts to contact the subscriber and find additional information. (ECF No. 15; ECF No. 18.)
This conduct contravenes the Court’s order to cease discovery. Plaintiff has provided no justification why it ignored the Court’s order.
° This response was filed in AF Holdings LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-5709-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed July 2, 2012).
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 39
Odape2t Pws668R3 OARS GCE dou leahs Resi €H 70ers 1 Bape Raielat GalgeEH Age: 608 #:816
Z. Fraud on the Court
Upon review of papers filed by attorney Morgan E. Pietz, the Court perceives that Plaintiff may have defrauded the Court. (ECF No. 23.)’ At the center of this issue 1s the identity of a person named Alan Cooper and the validity of the underlying copyright assignments.’ If it is true that Alan Cooper’s identity was misappropriated and the underlying copyright assignments were improperly executed using his identity, then Plaintiff faces a few problems.
First, with an invalid assignment, Plaintiff has no standing in these cases. Second, by bringing these cases, Plaintiff’s conduct can be considered vexatious, as these cases were filed for a facially improper purpose. And third, the Court will not idle while Plaintiff defrauds this institution.
D. Conclusion
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS Brett L. Gibbs, TO SHOW CAUSE why he should not be sanctioned for the following:
e In AF Holdings LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6636-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 1, 2012), violating the Court’s October 19, 2012 Order instructing AF Holdings to cease its discovery efforts based on information obtained through any earlier-issued subpoenas;
e In AF Holdings LLC vy. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6669-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), violating the Court’s October 19, 2012 Order instructing AF Holdings to cease its discovery efforts based on information obtained through any earlier-issued subpoenas;
‘ee.
: Although the papers revealing this possible fraud were filed in Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12- cv-8333-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Sept. 27, 2012), this fraud, if true, was likely committed by Plaintiff in each of its cases before this Court.
° For example, in AF Holdings LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6669-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), Plaintiff filed a copyright assignment signed by Alan Cooper on behalf of Plaintiffs. (ECF No. 16-1.)
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 40
Ctab8:22- CxO SHER ODI ANB CAR ober ents Hise 6 HIR208/1 BAga Gage inf GBA Hy ¢ 1609 #:817
ay
So Wo NY WB AHA Ee WW WN
e In Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6662-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), violating Rule 11(b)(2) by:
o alleging copyright infringement based on a snapshot of Internet activity, without conducting a reasonable inquiry; or,
o alleging that Benjamin Wagar is the infringer, without conducting a reasonable inquiry;
e In Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-6668-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Aug. 2, 2012), violating Rule 11(b)(2) by:
o alleging copyright infringement based on a snapshot of Internet activity, without conducting a reasonable inquiry; or,
o alleging that Mayon Denton is the infringer, without conducting a reasonable inquiry;
e In Ingenuity 13 LLC v. Doe, No. 2:12-cv-8333-ODW(JCx) (C.D. Cal. filed Sept. 27, 2012), perpetrating fraud on the Court by misappropriating the identity of Alan Cooper and filing lawsuits based on an invalid copyright assignment.
This order to show cause 1s scheduled for hearing on March 11, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., to provide Mr. Gibbs the opportunity to justify his conduct. Based on the unusual circumstances of this case, the Court invites Morgan E. Pietz to present evidence concerning the conduct outlined in this order. The Court declines to sanction Plaintiffs AF Holdings LLC and Ingenuity 13 LLC at this time for two reasons: (1) Mr. Gibbs appears to be closely related to or have a fiduciary interest in Plaintiffs; and; (2) it is likely Plaintiffs are devoid of assets.
If Mr. Gibbs or Mr. Pietz so desire, they each may file by February 19, 2013, a brief discussing this matter. The Court will also welcome the appearance of Alan Cooper—to either confirm or refute the fraud allegations.
Based on the evidence presented at the March 11, 2013 hearing, the Court will
consider whether sanctions are appropriate, and if so, determine the proper
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 41
Casaer
ay
So Wo NY WB A Fe WW WN
2: 2ACROSGERS BDU ANG CA) im oireottes Hibitea |6 i EU8B/1 Bada dade lof Bag & Ho ¢ 11 0 #:818
punishment. This may include a monetary fine, incarceration, or other sanctions sufficient to deter future misconduct. Failure by Mr. Gibbs to appear will result in the automatic imposition of sanctions along with the immediate issuance of a bench warrant for contempt. IT ISSO ORDERED. February 7, 2012
Gud liod OTIS D. WRIGHT, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 42
Case 2:12@as@8383-0M)A696-EDiicuMeot bith S4kedAwWaO2!3B1/Pag@ a4gaif 488 Page ID #:819
Exhibit B
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 43
Case 2:12@as@8383-0M)4696-EDiic uMeot bith 4k dO waO2!31/Pag® agax 488 Page ID
#:820 Contact Report Report Expiration Tony Saltmarsh eee Name_ Tony Saltmarsh Age 28 Date of Birth 1/17/1985 Phone Number N/A Additional Phone 603-224-4510, 601-848-5514 Numbers Most Recent Address 314 W Monte Cristo Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85023-7420 Aliases/Name_ Anthony J Saltmarsh Variations
Email: Tony Saltmarsh
b****@comcast.net 122 Bow Bog Road Bow, NH 03304 Tony Saltmarsh
b****@attbi.com 122 Bow Bog Road Bow, NH 03304 Tony Saltmarsh
b****@aol.com 122 Bow Bog Road Bow, NH 03304 Tony Saltmarsh
b****@attbi.com 122 Bow Bog Road Bow, NH 03304 Tony Saltmarsh
ee 122 Bow Bog Road
b****@attbi.com Bow, NH 03304 601-848-5514 Tony Saltmarsh
b****@comcast.net 122 Bow Bog Rd Bow, NH 03304-3902 Tony Saltmarsh
b****@attb1.com 122 Bow Bog Rd Bow, NH 03304-3902 Tony Saltmarsh
b****@geocities.com 122 Bow Bog Rd Bow, NH 03304-3902 Tony Saltmarsh
t****@msn.com 122 Bow Bog Rd Bow, NH 03304-3902
4 addresses were found
Address City, State, Zip Phone Added Updated
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 44
Case 2:12@as@8383-0M)4696-EDiie uMeot bith 4k dH waO2!3B1/Pag® a4§axz 488 Page ID
#:821 314 W Monte Cristo Ave Phoenix, AZ 85023-7420 7/2011 7/2011 4532 E Villa Theresa Dr Phoenix, AZ 85032-1554 4/2009 4/2009 17212 N Scottsdale Rd, Apt Scottsdale, AZ 85255-9615 2/2007 9/2007 2312 122 Bow Bog Rd Bow, NH 03304-3902 603-224-4510 2007
Possible Relatives
Possible relatives are people who are likely relatives of Tony Saltmarsh based on matching surname and shared addresses. Please note that this will not include all relatives.
5 possible relatives were found
Aaron A Saltmarsh
Alexander W Saltmarsh
Brandy Eileen Saltmarsh
Davis
Stephanie L Edwards
Name Age Address
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 45
Case 2:12C@as@8383-0M)A696-EDiicuMeot bith +edHWaO2!31/Pag@ a4gaif 488 Page ID #:822
Exhibit C
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 46
Case 2:12@as@8383-0M)4696-EDiicuMeot bith Hed waO2131/Pagagax 488 Page ID
#:823
Contact Report
Jayme C Steele
Name Jayme C Steele
Age 35
Date of Birth 3/30/1977 Phone Number 320-592-0011 Additional Phone 702-223-5209, 952-903-5343
Numbers
Most Recent Address 314 W Monte Cristo Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85023-7420 Aliases/Name Jamey Steele
Variations
14 addresses were found
Address
Added Updated
314 W Monte Cristo Ave
7/2011 7/2011 21251 220th St 6/2005 11/2006 3743 Irvington Ave 2/2000 12/2005 7641 128th St W
12/1995
21468 E Bonanza Way
21067 220th St
4532 E Villa Theresa Dr
Phone
City, State, Zip
Phoenix, AZ 85023-7420
Mc Grath, MN 56350-4117
320-592-0011
Miami, FL 33133-6105
Saint Paul, MN 55124-9767
Queen Creek, AZ 85142-3291
320-592-0011
Mc Grath, MN 56350-4019
Phoenix, AZ 85032-1554
Report Expiration July 30, 2013
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 47
Case 2:12@as@8383-0M)4696-EDiicuMeot bith Hed waO2131/Pag® 4gax 488 Page ID
#:824 4404 Sandhorse Ct Las Vegas, NV 89130-5212 102-223-5209 222 Zamora Ave, Apt 7 Coral Gables, FL 33134-3930 7511 Bristol Village Dr Minneapolis, MN 55438-2562 952-903-5343 3160 Florida Ave Miami, FL 33133-5113 824 Jefferson Ave Miami Beach, FL 33139-5632 5933 Lagorce Dr Miami Beach, FL 33140-2137
Possible Relatives
Possible relatives are people who are likely relatives of Jayme C Steele based on matching surname and shared addresses. Please note that this will not include all relatives.
4 possible relatives were found
Deborah A Steele
Elizabeth N Steele
John Lawrence Steele Jr
John L J Steel
Name Age Address
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 48
Case 2:12@as@8383-0M)AG696-EDiicuMeot bith tedHWaO2!3B1/Pag® agaif 488 Page ID #:825
Exhibit D
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 49
23/13 Case 2:12¢as@83B3-0EDAGIG- EDGE eater ESE) RAO?) B1/PAage SGeH 88 Page ID
VPR INC.
Business Entity Information
11972010 Type | Domestic Corporation [Entity Number: | E0540532010-2 Qualifying State: List of Officers Due: | 11/30/2012
NV Business ID: | NV20101804310 — nieemse 1! 1130/2012
Registered Agent Information
1785 EAST SAHARA SPIEGEL & UTRERA, P.A. |Address 1: AVENUE, SUITE 490
Address2) «| SC*~<~“~*~*~*«~d=SS*~*~LS VEGAS a Maing Address; | ——~—~—S~«*iMing cress 2 [| Maiing iy: | ——~SS~S*~dMng Sete:
ngZ es
Noncommercial Registered Agent
Financial Information
No Par Share Count: O00 Capital Amount: $ 75,000.00 Par Share Count: 75,000.00 Par Share Value: $ 1.00
Officers || Include Inactive Officers President - ALAN COOPER
| ie EAST VILLA THERESA Address 2:
ity: PHOENIX ate: I 85032 ountry:
Secretary - ALAN COOPER
| nie EAST VILLA THERESA Adgesce
ity: PHOENIX I 85032
nvsos.g owsosentitysearch/PrintC orp.aspx?|x8nvg = O9WAXpS7ZKVXCR8038VNVEA%253d% 253d
:
NAINIO
S|] 2 Ol | 3 iS) n O. Nn O —
YN a ot .@)
5 5 2
NINIA
S\e| 2 Ol" | g © n ©. N © —
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 50
2613 Case 2:12@as@83R3M2896-EDEwirRsatrs GaSb Treasurer - ALAN COOPER #:82/
Ema
Director - ALAN COOPER
Address 1: 2 pe Address 2: DR PHOENIX
Sat
Actions\Amendments
Articles of Incorporation 11/972010 Bective Date: | SS
Initial Stock Value: Par Value Shares: 75,000 Value: $ 1.00 No Par Value Shares: 0 Total Authorized Capital: $ 75,000.00
20100868226-35 # of Pages:
11/1772010 (No notes for this action)
4/10/2012 (No notes for this action)
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 51 nvsos.g owsosentitysearch/PrintC orp.aspx?|x8nvg = O9WAXpS7ZKVXCR8038VNVEA%253d% 253d
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 52 of 130 Page ID #:828
KAHIBIT |
EXHIBIT T Supplemental Exhibits - Page 52
POLO DOMAASS 2NLYAGSOB8ESnOba\did Sante Agel ment ries _ Film -OwneQ/potoddhage.@habhahiiPBGS yh vS4x1-7U...
Search Domain or keyword /GO | Login
Domain Names Web Hosting Email Hosting Website Tools Domain Tools
Copyright POLO DOMAINS 2011. Privacy Statement | Terms | Limits | Domain Generator | Domain Reseller | Cheap Domains
LAL " ANY m@ BAT RY WY BRT OY 47 1 me
GET YOUR B
ONL NOTISSUES.COM : tissues (en) no (en)
=, Share Your Experience. se, Leave acomment about this Website w
Webs
Nameserver Histroy DNS record history dfe n DB: 53 : Wednesday 30 March 2011 (Old Record) No DNS record data yet, this domain has been queued for free NS63. DOMAINCONTROL.COM (972893) checking (Should be an hour or so) : NS64.DOMAINCONTROL.COM (970180) Califo DB: 94 : Thursday 7 June 2012 >>> NOW : No records for this period busine Domain may have expired or is not assigned nameservers
GET YO Penne nennnnnee FREE WEB Whois on 17-April-2011 Refresh Data $0.99 Domains at Go Dadd
Click here to GoDaddy.com Free wabsite
Ring ad @ remove whois data Why Pay More? Compare Us! Free Hosting w/Site Builder & More.
=>
(Goo
Whois Server Version 2.0
AdChoices [> --SI-VSCompRegistrars---
Domain Name: NOTISSUES.COM Registrar: godaddy.com, inc.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com Name Server: NS63.DOMAINCONTROL.COM Name Server: NS64.DOMAINCONTROL.COM Status: clientDeleteProhibited Status: clientRenewProhibited Status: clientTransferProhibited Status: clientUpdateProhibited Updated Date: 24-mar-2011
Creation Date: 24-mar-2011
Expiration Date: 24-mar-2012
1 of 3 2/18/13 12:25 PM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 53
POLO DOMAASS 2NLYAGSOB8ESnOba\did Santo agelment rae a Film -OwneQ/potoddnage.@thabaah/ii BGR yh) vS4x1-7U...
>>> Last update of whois database: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 22:43:37 UTC <<<
--SI-VSNotice---
--SI-VSTerms---
--SI-GDDDisclaimer---
--SI-GDDnotRegistrant---
Registrant: Alan Cooper 4532 E Villa Theresa Dr. Phoenix, Arizona 85032
United States
Registered through: godaddy.com, inc. (http://www.godaddy.com) Domain Name: NOTISSUES.COM
Created on: 24-Mar-11
Expires on: 24-Mar-12
Last Updated on: 24-Mar-11
Administrative Contact:
johnisteele@gmail.com
4532 E Villa Theresa Dr.
Cooper, Alan
Phoenix, Arizona 85032 United States
4806489301 Fax --
Technical Contact:
johnisteele@gmail.com
4532 E Villa Theresa Dr.
Cooper, Alan
Phoenix, Arizona 85032 United States
4806489301 Fax --
Domain servers in listed order:
NS63 . DOMAINCONTROL.COM
NS64 . DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Commenter's name (Your Name)
2 of 3 2/18/13 12:25 PM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 54
POLO DOMAASS 2NLYAGSOB8ESnOba\idid Nanld agelment a Filme -Oehdgaiotoahade.@nabaahii Page yi vS4x1-7U...
Comment Subject
Comment Body
ee | . Submit )
No comments yet.
3 of 3 2/18/13 12:25 PM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 55
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 56 of 130 Page ID #:832
KAHIBIT U
EXHIBIT U Supplemental Exhibits - Page 56
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 57 of130 Page I/D #:833
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS LAW DIVISION
GUAVA LLC, , - No fap R Ly}
Petitioner, ¥.
COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
i i a al
Respondent.
= © ra S Ie 2 Ee = a = ie oO z = ay = © = ee Za : ; 5
PERSONS AND ENTITIES
I. Petitioner, Guava LLC, through its undersigned attomey, hereby petitions this Court for entry of an Order requiring Comcast Cable Communications LLC (“Comcast”) to provide the idenufying information of the subscribers associated with the Internet Protocol (“TP”) addresses listed on Exhibit A attached hereto, and in support thereof, states as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
2. Petitioner brings this petition pursuant to Dlinois Supreme Court Rule 224 to identify unidentified John Does (“Does”) so that Petitioner may file an action for computer fraud and abuse and computer tampering against them.
THE PARTIES
cs Petitioner is a limited lability company that operates protected computer systems, including computer systems accessible in St. Clair County, Minos.
4, Respondent Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (“Comcast”) is an Internet Service Provider (“ISP”) that provides Intemet services to the Does that Petitioner seeks to
identify. Dees are known to Petitioner solely by an Internet Protocol (“IP”) address given to
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 57
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 58 of 130 Page I/D #:834
Does by Comcast. An IP address is a unique number that is assigned to Internet users by an ISP ala siven date and time.
5, Comcast records the time and date that it assigns an IP address to a subscriber and maintains in logs for a period of time a recard of the assignment. Comcast also maintain records which typically include the name, one or more addresses, one or more telephone numbers, and one or more e-mail addresses of the subscriber, However, these records ate not public and are not available to Petitioner at this time. Comeast is the only entity that can hnk the Does’ IP address to the Does’ true identity.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
6, Pursuant to 134 TH. 2d R. 224 “[t]he action for discovery shall be initiated by the filing of a venfied petition in the circuit court of the county in which the action or proceeding might be brought or nm which one or more of the persons or entities from whom discovery is sought resides.” Venue is proper because at least one of the Doe Defendants resides in St. Clair County, [Hinois. Further, Comcast transacts business in St. Clasr County, Hlinois.
7 This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter because a petition for prée-suit discovery falls within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Circuit Court. fil. Const., Art. VI, § 9; 134 ll, 2d R. 224; see also Shutes v. Fowler, 584 N.E2d 920, 923 (DI. App. Ct. 1991) (‘Rule 224 is constitutional and confers subject-matter jurisdiction on the circust court.”)
BACKGROUND
&. Hacking has become 4 serious threat to anyone maintaining private or protected computer systems. See Michae! Mimoso, Cybercrime Gang Recruiting Botmasters for Large- Scale MiTM Attacks on American Banks, THE THREAT Post, Oct. 4, 2012, attached hereto as
Exhibit B (explaining that “fals many as 30 banks have been targeted” recently by cyber
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 58
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 59 of 130 Page I/D #:835
hackers.}: Bryon Acohido, Ne Slowdown in Sight for Cyberattacks, USA ToDAy, July 30, 2012, attached herete as Exhibit C (Eddie Schwartz, chief secunty officer of security firm RSA stating that “[ijt’s easier and safer for a criminal to steal money from an online bank account, rather than have to walk into a bank — or to steal intellectual property in an online setting, rather than have to send in a human spy.”}.
2 Even large corporations and governmental agencies are not immune from hacking attacks, See Kim Zettet, Hackers Release 1 Million Apple Device {Ds Allegedly Stoten Fram FBI Laptop, WIRED, Sepr. 4, 2012, attached hereto as Exhibit D (explaming that a hacker group obtained “1 million Apple device IDs that” were “obtained from an FBI computer they hacked.”}.
10. Companies harmed by hacking are encouraged to seak relief in the courts. See Glenn Chapman, Cyber Defenders Urges te go on the Offense, AMERICAN PREE Press, July 26, 2012, attached hereto as Exhibit E (former FBI cyber come unit chief Shawn Henry explaining that “I believe the threat from computer network attack is the most significant threat we face as a civilized world, other than a weapon of mass destruction.” and Black Hat fotmder Jeff Moss proposing that “cyber attackers alsa be fought on legal fronts, with companies taking suspected culprits fo court.”).
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS A. Computer Fraad And Abuse
iT. Planaff owns and operates computer systems that distribute third-party adult
entertamment content. By way of analogy, Plaintiff is tke a satellite radio station in that it
distributes content owned by others. Plaintiff generates revenue by requiring third-parties to pay
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 59
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 60 of 130 Page I/D #:836
a fee for accessing its distributions systems, Members are assigned a username and password in order to access the distribution system.
12. The Does obtained usernames and passwords from a website that ailows its members to trade stolen usernames and passwords amongst one another. The Does used the stolen usernames and passwords to gain unauthorized access to Plamtifi's protected computer systems. Once they gained unauthorized access to Plaintiff's protected computer systems, they penmnitted others to do the same.
13. The Does were able to access Plaintiff's computer systems as though they were paying members. The Does became privy to private information, including information regarding the identities of Plamtiff's customers, account information, financial information, computer programming and security information, and other information that Plamtff protects and does not even give access to third pariies, even those who pay for and obtain legitimate passwords to access Piaintiff's websites.
(4. Since Does accessed the website through a hacked password, they are not required to provide any identifying personal information, such as their trué names, addresses, telephone numbers or emai] addresses. Does can only be identified by their IP addresses.
IS. Petitioner identified the IP addresses associated with the hackers through computer software that allowed Petitioner to detect the unauthonzed breaches of its computer systems. The computer software detected the hacking, unauthorized access, and password sharing activity on Petitioner’s computer systems. The individuals committing these unlawful activities are identified by their IP addresses as well as the dates and times they unlawfully
accessed Petitioner's computer systems. This information is set forth m Exhibit A.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 60
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 61o0f130 Page I/D #:837
16. Once the IP address and date and time of unlawful access were ascertained, Petitioner used publicly available reverse-lockup databases on the Internet to determine what ISP issued the [P address. The Does Petitioner seeks to identify through this petition are all subscnbers of Comcast.
17. Petitioner has suffered a less due to the Does fraud and abuse of Petitioner’s computer systems in excess of $250,000. Petitioner has suffered a loss in the form of 1) costs associated with detecting the unauthorized breaches and identifying the IP addresses of those associated, 2) costs associated with restoring its computer systems to their condition prior to the breach of ils computer systems and preventing future breaches, and 3) lost revenue and costs incurred due to interruption of service.
i8. The above alleged facts support a claim of computer fraud and abuse by Petitioner against the Does under 18 U.S.C. § 1030.!
B. Computer Tampering
19. The allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs are hereby re-alleged as if fuily set forth herein.
20. The Does knowingly, and without the authorization of Petitioner, accessed Petitioner's computer systems.
21. Once the Does gatned unauthorized access, they knowingly, and without the authorization af Petitioner, obtained data and services as though they were paying members.
22. Pettoner has suffered a loss due to the Does unauthorized tampering of Petitioner's computer systems in excess of $250,000. Petitioner has suffered a loss in the form of
|) costs associated with detecting the unauthorized breaches and identifying the IP addresses of
a private right of action exists under the Act under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(g).
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 61
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 62 of 130 Page I/D #:838
29. “Petitioner has a right to the relief sought in order to identify the unknown Does, which is a condition precedent to Petitioner filing an action against the Does, who will be defendants.
30. The discovery sought is matertal to Petitioner's anticipated actions at law.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Court enter a judgment:
(A) Entering an Order reguinng Comcast to tum over the foilowing identiifymeg information of the subscribers associaled with the IP addresses listed on Exhibit A, attached hereto:
* True Name;
¢ Address;
¢ Telephone Number;
« E-mail Address: and
« Media Access Control Address.
(B) Granting Petitioner further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
Respectiuily submitted,
GUAVA LLC
a
Paul A, Duffy, Esq. (Bar No. 6210496) 2N. LaSalle Street
13th Floor |
Chicago, IL 60602
312-952-6136
Attorney for Petitioner
DATED: November 16, 2012
By:
7
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 62
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 63 of 130 Page ID #:839
By: (ORZLAA,
Kevin T. Hoerner, #6196686 Becker, Paulson, Hoemier & Thompson, P.C.
SII] West Main Street Belleville, IL 62226
(618) 235-0020
Attorney for Petitioner
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 63
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 mee 64 of 130 = ID #:840 a
‘ 1 VERIFICATION F * “ k a a Lal 7 = r e : ha livder Tenahties Gf perury as proviged av law gursuani to seciog 1-DON of Uae Jonie Gi DOL OTOCEGEE the undersraieed ovpifies than the snitemienmis set berth ty thes wisirumtens de ire 1 Fi 2 a n urank "a we i he iy “_ a aly peers T ae ue we, 73 +h F 4 = Ace UO Yee ENCED OS fe Tiagkeys event Sttied iG Oc OO MNfOInatION Gad Relic grel 2a te sack a "ters rhe undersigned? cermiies as divressid that in€ andessignedceriy Beliose the same ie be a : a Of we = 2 i a 4 a w 7. / we a ae a = — _— f bbe" YY eae i as we ac oe all al ior Togs — Denckssamt M_EVSC BIBLE Domi SAORN TD —— Te . 7 a in Aeiuee See TRE Te dav af OTB Re MTT. a, oo aa ? f | ee a te 2 +e x ‘enary Public ? 7 * j i+ ‘ if 5 1 A r 1 ™ A nd
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 64
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 65 of130 Page I/D #:841
EXHIBIT A
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 65
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 66 of 130 Page ID | #:842
73.9.253.149 3.25.47.84 4.1,107.63 4.1,141.155 41.175.233 41191 211 4.175.199 4,1.95.156 24.1.98.146___ 4.12.160.43 4.12.160.5
24.12.17.76 2012-08-16 17:12:21 24.12.215.82 [2012-11-06 15:25:41 4.12.30.72 24.12.9.238 4.33,103.83 4.13.418.250 24.13.137.179 | 4,13.161.156 4.13.172.38 4.13,178.197
iS | a ou a 5 [A
bh
ph A A
rh | Ro ate | ra [pa — | — — | po ont or J] | La
ce.
Bod | df Rt ho
ts | re | hh} Pa wd] CA] Cad La | A | oo] of
>
Hh
24,15.187.100 — |2012-08-11 01:23:45 24.13.235.108 — |2012-08-14 18:29:03 24.13,59.132 2012-09-15 10:35:30
4.14.103,125 4.14.116.213 — [2012-09-13 17:10:10 4,14,.122.52 24.14,13.193 24.14.130.85 [2022-10-06 16:43:11 | 4.14.162.27 [2012-08-20 23:02:49 4.14.168.183 4.14.175.98 4.14.188.2 24.14.1912 4.14.591.209 [2012-10-25 18:28:44 | 4.14.211.234 4.14.22.26
H
:
24.15.0.234 [2013-11-09 17:41:30. 2012-11-04 07:50:59 24.15.188.130 [2012-10-29 20:50:23 _
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 66
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 67 of 130 Page ID #:843
24.15.94.96 [2012-40-15 07:11:54
1129.92.32 [2012-10-24 20:34:18 | 169. 2 “48:
0.129,92,32
30.141.247.73 — |2012-10-05 03:51:20
67.167,112.222 [2012-10-24 21:51:26 |
67.167.13.9 O12-10-22 16:02:08 |
67.167,13.99 1212-09-29 06:57:11 67.167.18.189 [2012-11-10 00:01.59 (67,167.210.178 |2012-] 1-15 66:40:40
2
bho
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 67
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 68 of 130 Page ID | #:844
ch
67.167.246.116 12012-10-24 08:07:08 _ 167.173.104.228 [2012-10-10 05:53:29 12-11-12 15:33:13 9012-10-09 00:52:13 012-09-25 14:53:13 012-10-13 21:43:46 67.173.7).42 [2082-09-13 04:21:13 67.173.81.33 [2032-10-08 14:16:06 67.173.94.229 [2012-08-16 01:30:21 167.174.1222 [2012-08-08 17:41:23 12-10-26 13:22:10 0112-09-23 02:06:36 12-08-08 15:14:57 0123-10-10 23:57:29 167.475.167.179 ]2012-10-31 02:41:14 67.375.219.14 — )2012-11-15 02:16:55 67,475.225.135 |2012-10-L7 07:27:02
am hs)
oa
om | ch | oo ch] oh] oh | oA fF en
on
67.176,150.212 |2012-09-24 03:23:17 |
FATGASS.S2 (2012-11-09 18:34:34
2012-4 1-10 04:21:16
67.186.83.184 [2012-10-05 17:56:05 67.186.92.192 [2012-11-12 22:33:48 | 68.57.231.126 68.57.233.25 _|2012-10-14 05:51:31 68.58.155.157 2012-08-18 21:48:40 2012-Lk-12, 15:47:23 69.136.9.65 2012-10-24 07:20:53 69.246.215.8 |2012-10-30 21:55:53
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 68
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 69 of 130 Page ID #:845
ai
9.246.223,186 1.194.120-21 [2012-10-21 20:48:17 1,194.120.232 [2012-09-16 16:34:15
L.AS4.185.170 [2012-09-15 16:52:26
2 T.E94.189.101 |2012-11-10 00:36:23
1 ,E94,.248.8 2042-10-22 09:13:14
1.194.47.68 1.194.6,203 [2012-08-27 16:48:55 1.194.75.167 1194.76.21 |.194.86.35 1.201.196.162 1.201.20.218 [2012-10-16 08:51:40 1.201.200.2100 1.201.225.1411 71.201.240.10 [2012-10-13 15:30:35 2012-08-09 15:27:28 73.228,23.118 [2012-08-13 23:57:58. | '71.228.23.45 [2012-08-15 20:52:23 71.229.75,58 1.239.129.20 1.239.186,221 1.239.187.67 1,239.253,249
:
ae
~~] ~1
1.239,27.180 1239.43.67 1.239.44.253 1,239.55.92 1.239.6L.141 1.239.90.45 2012-09-29 20:11:30
1.57.3.17 1,57.53,24 1,57,44.80 1.57.63. 157
|.$7.92.76 75,150,227 .205 76.16.11 2012-30-04 O41 1:17 6.16,189.233 6.16.213.19 6.16.243.52
“J
6.16.255.166 [2012-09-09 03.56.24 2012-08-15 22:42:40
6.23.65.126
bo —! tab bo “> . + = Ww S tr ct
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 69
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 70 of 130 Page ID #:846
6.23.68]
6.23,78.180 6.29.26.158_ 6.29.32.36
$.29.35.172 2012-10-26 16:22:59
6.29.36.240 [2012-11-01 16:17:39 | 6.29.44.43 2012-10-25 20:40:39
6.29.53.56 [2012-10-15 14:40:17 | 6.29.63.21 [2042-10-11 01:13:57 |
6.29.79.47 2012-10-01 04:11:21
6.29.97 30 2012-11-09 §6:11:12
8.193.910.519 |2012-10-01 23:52:43
R.193.41,242 — |2012-09-19 09:48:45
8.193.9.222 {2012-10-01 02:38:37
8.206. 106,234 8.206.11.227 — |2012-11-15 15:49:25 B.206.118.16 |2012-10-27 20:04:04 8.206.198.204 |2012-08-31 23:26:45
$.206.227.66 [2012-08-10 19:49:36
a} [s)] 63] se] hI] LA
wo
:
Ww
§.206.231.28 8.206.245.122 8.206.38.123 $.206.40.164 — |2012-08-07 20:23:47
8.206.44.107 8206.48.24! 8.206.98.9 8212.11.49 #.212.135.39 8.212.155.1058
8.212.190.193 8.212.196.2089 [2012-10-06 07:07:31
8.212.197.162 $.212,220.251
8.212.227.110 [2032-08-02 21:56:21 8.212.36.159 [2012-10-21 22:48:49 B.212.49,254 [2012-08-18 18:23:38 B,212,62.146 8.213.105.3 1202-09-14 00:03:10
8.213.108. 128 8.213.127 203 8.213.129.83
8.213.154.107 {2012-16-08 06:29:27 $.213.161.246 |2052438-22 00:48:41
B.215.177,606 (2012-10-23 11:42:38
2
iva) fh
i
“ia
wa
ww
8.213.382.122 |2012-10-07 16:34:40 8.283.192.42 — |2012-09-23 17:08:44
8.213.208.66 — |2012-10-12 62:52:53
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 70
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 71 0f130 Page ID #:847
8.213,210,20 98.213.227.230 8.213.232.172 8.213.38.72 8.213.47.27
8.213,51.85 2012-08-15 22:37:53 §.213.88.54 2012-09-30 03:04:53
§.213.93.B1 2012-10-06 19:45:37 8.214 161.8 2012-10-27 02:45:40
8.214.170.43 8.214.917 ,213 8.215.116.187 {2612-11-10 02:16:37 | 8.215.210.179
Wh
:
$.215.212.122 (2012-1 )-07 23:36:50 9.215.224.1432 [2012-08-03 05:01:51 2
8.215.227.45
8.215.249, 197
8.215,32.36
8.215.35.193
$.215.54.93 9 7
2 8.215.77.122 — 12012-09-29 20:47:48 8.215.86.225 |2012-10-28 06:34:41
8.223.65.129 8.222.74.155 8.222,75.251 8.222.90.191 8.223.10.117 8.223.168.20] 8.223.212.218 8.293.3.225
8.222.132,14 012-00-21 19:32:16 $,222.55,252 012-10-30 01:50:09
Kr
wo
8.223.8.13 98,223.8.234 [2012-10-01 18:5424_ 8.223.89.194 [2012-08-01 14:56:54
2 fi 8.226.118.15 — 12012-08-23 16:26:46 $.226.17.73 2012-10-12 13:41:22 2
$,226.211.151 8.226.68.25 8.227 .107.209 8.227, 107.24
8.227.110.3418 {2012-11-08 06:48:20
6.227.134.132 [2012-10-22 16:04:40 2
>}
8.227.137 60 012-09-27 09:04:14 §.227.146.114 [2012-41-01 02:10:16
O
l 2 8.227.166.1461 |2012-10-27 21:42:55 98.227.220.235 |2012-10-11 01:24:35
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 71
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 72 of 130 Page ID #:848
8.227.221.131 [2012-09-25 16:18:04 | 98.227.36.287 [2012-11-05 15:18:21 | 2012-08-20 15:23:41
8.228.196.35 |2012-10-02 22:55:42
98.228.214.119 |2012-1 1-12 21:38:02
98,.228.231.69 (2082-10-30 04:26:13 98.228.239.222 |2012-08-10 01:41:49
198.228.73.51 [2032«10-09 02:14:13 2012-08-15 00:37:52 98.253.39.234 |2012-10-12 01:52:04
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 72
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 73 of 130 Page ID #:849
KAHIBIT B
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 73
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 74 0f130 Page ID #:850
those associated, 2) costs associated with restoring its computer systems to their condition prior to the breach of its computer systems and preventing future breaches, and 3) lost revenue and costs incurred dué to interruption of service.
23. The above alleged facts support a claim of Computer Tampering under 720 [LCS § § 16D-3.
PRE-SUIT DISCOVERY
24. The ailegations contained in the preceding paragraphs are hereby re-alleged as if fully set Forth herein.
25. Bach Doe used one or more hacked passwords to gain unauthorized access to Petitiouer’s protected computer systems in direct violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030, and Computer Tampering, 720 ILCS 5 $ 16D-3.
26, The above alleged facts support claims of computer frand and abuse and computer amber by Petitioner against the Does. Petitioner will be an actual party, arid not merely a witness or other third party to the claims brought against the Does.
27. Petitioner does not know the Dogs’ ime identities. Each of the Does’ true identities is Known only to each Doe and by Comeast, to which cach Doe subscribes.
28, Petitioner seeks the name, address, telephone number, email address, MAC address and any other form of information that may be used to dentity the Does. Petitioner is interested In and entitled to this information so that Petitioner may bring claims of computer
frand and abuse and computer tampering against the Does in this county.
* A private cight of action exists under the Statute under 720 ILCS § § 16D-3(c).
6
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 74
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 75 o0f130 Page ID #:851
October 4, 2042, 12:15PM
Cybercrime Gang Recruiting
Botmasters for Large-Scale MiTM Attacks on American Banks
by Michae! Mimoso
A stew of major American banks, some already stressec by a stream of DDoS attacks carried out over [he oast 10 days, may soon have to brace themselves for a large-scale coordinated attack bent on pulling off frauduient wire transfers.
RSA's FraudAction rasearch team has been monitoring uncerground chatter and has put together various clues to deduce that a cyoarcrime gang Is actively recruiling up to 100 botmasters to pariicipate in a complicated man-in-the-middle hijacking scam using a variant of the proprietary Goz!
Trojan.
This is the first time a private cybercrima organization has racruttad outsiders to participate in a financially motivated attack, said Mor Ahuvia, cybercrime communications specialist for ASA FraudAction. The attackers are promising their recruiis a cut of the profits, and are requiring an initial investment in hardware and training in how to deploy the Gozi Prinimalka Trojan, Anuvia added. Also, the gang wil! only share executable files with their partners, and will net give up the Trojan's compilers, keeping the recruits dependent an the gang for updates
Generally, cybercrime gangs deploy as few as five individual botmasiers ta help in successful campaigns; with this kind of scale, banks could be facing up 30 times the number of compromised machines and fraudulent transfers, if the campaign ts successful.
“This Trojan is not well known. This is nol SpyEve or Citadel: it's not available for everyone to buy,” Ahuvia said. “Security vendors and antivirus signatures are less likely to catch it or be famifiar with it. It will b@ tricky for vendors to detect and block it. This gang is keeping a tight hold on the compiler. By only giving up executable files, they can control how any antivirus signatures are in the wild and keep unique signatures to 4 minimum.”
AS many as 30 banks have been targeted, many of them well known and high profile, Ahuvia said. RASA said the gang is targeting American banks because of past Success in beating their defenses, as well as a jack of two-factor authentication requirad for wire transfers.Some European banks, for example, require consumers to use two-factor authenticatian. She added that RSA FraudAction was unsure how far along the recruitment campaign had gone, or when the attacks would launch.
"There is the chance that once we've gone public, they may abandan their plans because there’s too much buzz around it,” Ahuvia said. "On the other hand, | don't think anything we know will have such
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 75
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 76 of 130 Page I/D #:852
a dramatic effect on them. There are so many Trojans available and so many points of failure in securlly that could go wrong, that they'd still hava some chance of success.”
RSA's researchers were able to make the connection to the Gazi Prinimalka Trojan, which has been in circulation since 2008 and responsible for $5 million in fraud-relatad lossas. Prinimalka is similar to the Gozi Trojan in technical and operational aspects, HSA said, leading to speculation the Hangiip Team, which was tied to previous Gozi attacks, is behind this attack as well. Prinimatka is
Russian for the word "receive" and is a folder name in every URL patch given dy this parhcular gang to ils crimeware servers.
Prinimaika uses the same bot-to-server communication pattern and URL trigger list as Gozi, RSA said. But deployment of the two Trajans is different: Gozi writes a singiée DLL fila to bots upan
deployment, while Prinimaika writes two, an executable file and a DAT iile which reports fo the command and control server.
Once the Trojan is launched, the botmaster fires up a vitual machine synching module. Tha module then duplicates the victim's computer, Including identifiabie features such as time zone, screen resolution, cookies, browser type and version, and software identification, RSA said. This allows ihe botmaster to impersonate the victim's machine and access ther accounts. Access is carried out over a SOCKS proxy connection instaliad on the victin’s machine, RSA said.
The cloned virtual system then can move about on the genuine iP address of the compromised machine when accessing the bank website. Taking ita step further, the attackers deploy VolP phone floading software that will prevent the victim from receiving a confirmaiion call or text alerting tham to unusual lransfer activity, ASA said.
"They are looking for this to be 4 quick campaign," Ahuvia said. “They want to make as much as they can until the banks and users harden their systems, They want ta cash out quickly.”
Commenting on this Article will be aufomatically closed on January 4, 2013.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 76
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 77 of 130 Page ID #:853
EXHIBIT C
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 77
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 78 of 130
10/6/12
#:854
No slowdown In sight for cyberatiacks — USATODAY.com
“ . 4 - = 7 ow aon ek
No slowdown in sight for cyberattacks
LL, = 1 ~ _ = ioral ata CRA TODA?
Pe Sea ae Pedy
LAS VEGAS - Cyber attacks are accelerating af a pace that suggests the Intamet- already a risky environment - is likely to pose a steadHy growing threat to individuals and
compares for years to come.
Gedy |eneges ET ECE ar TE SESS Ga a a eae ale sars rhreas Ate fmesr 2.4 24 fired a cceis allig MIN 2-4 Sat Greed Mua s legit | meget Oe] 4S Se SED fe doe.
That's the samber consensus of security and internet experts parlclpating in the giant Black Hat oybersecurily conference (hat conchited here this weak.
iniaenel-generated atlacks comprise “the mosi slanificant inreat we face as 6 civilzed world, other than a weapon of mass destruction,” Shawn Haney, formar head of the FBIs cybercrime unil, tok’ some 6,500 atiendees in ¢ keynole address.
doe Slawart, Dell SecurevV¥orks' director of mahvare research, presented research detailing tha activities of wo large cyber gangs, one based in Shanghai the other In Beging, that have cracked Into the networks af Ihousends of companies over the past hall dozan years.
The allacks invarlably bagin by infecting (he computer of Ona émplayee, then using ihat machine as a teehold jo patiently probe deep info the company’s newark The end game: to steal Custorter lists, patents, bidding proposals and other sensitive documents.
Usatodey30 usatoday.comitach/news/story/2 2-07-26/nMack-hat-cyber-thres 5353940014
Page ID
Videos you may be interested |n
Eoascrsate Lith
Sean Bean Shea adele Sh SASS ae wets Fal 18 stn dflerercet oo) TR rien eh Ey raboola Mere videqs
en hare dena is
Patsy Cline cover artist Power Skyper Conquered stage fright Love my Acer
Powered by Margaret
Aspire | V5
Your AC, errighhed vind i
Most Papufar
Stores RF Test Don't fall for Facobook “privacy notice Smant Gfflta 2: O versatile sothware sure
Videos £o Baig revlaws Kindle Faperandite "Pregnant mai’ struggies (niough nah dheorce Tennis Chena! Court Report 9-30-2012
Photos Mayan calendar discovery Fatabook Apple iPhone 5 [Irat day sales
1
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 78
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 79 of 130 Page I/D
! +
Sponsored Links
G21 move O1e speed, shte act erormaice yo ove, Lasers merce. Ts PRs caer
Tig God Machine ean create men bat team generic anything cise with iné cjitk of 9 futon,
gles Mea Boge mia
#7855
Most Popular E-mad News iether Fach gang le madé up of dozens of employees playing
complamantary roles In afacks thal are “steallhy and persistent,” says Stewarl. “Ever if thay do gat discoverad and get kicked oul of a network, thay come back, targeting a cilfarant amployea."
Sigh up to get: Top vawad stories. pois gallanes and 25m munity poss ofthe day
Host popular rloht nowy: TF Tost
Another gang, analyzed by Dell SecureWarks’ researcher Greil Stone-Gross, has been Blasting out spam, designed to sifp past spam filers. The messages
Discover Mamsat® Windoss Anne. Sogn bior @ Free $O-Day Tiel! AC DT RS OS
carry instruciens io dick on a link fo read bogus delivery inva ipes, atllne reservations aor cediohone bilis. THe link, however, takes the. user lo a web page that installs
Buyalinkhere 7a ltuié soRuar c.
Sioné-Gross said the gang currently has access fo 678 006 infacted PCs, some of which are used te carry Gut ils iucrative soaclalty: orchestrating gaudulent wire transters frem ontina banking accounts.
Meanwhile, ¢ different calagory of hackets is stepping up stacks, not on individual PCs, buf on company websites. Websile sttacks now roulinaly occur thaysands of times aach, as Criminals probe for ways to breach databases carrying usernemes and piséwords and other Vaiuabie data, says Oevid Koretz, generat manager at wabsile security firm Mykonos, 6 division of Juniper Népyorks
Some successful website hackers enjoy boasting —by publically posting some, if nol mst, of the sinten data. Thal's hapoaned recently wilh date stolen from online ralailer éappos, matchmaking ste eHarmany, business social nehvorking site Linkedin and search giant Yahoo, Keratz says.
Experis gay web atlatks continua té escalate parily because powerful, aasy-te-se hacking programs are widely available for free. What's more, opportunities for an intruner to take Gantfol af an individuals PC, ar access and arobe a company's nebvork, ara mubipying as society uses more Intemet-deliveread services and infemel-cornected mobile devices,
"H's easier and seler for a cfiina| ld slaal money fram an online bank sccount, rather han have to walk ito a bank -- or Io staat intallectuzt properly in an anline saiting, rather than have to send ina human spy,” says Eddle Schwartz, chief securdy officer of security fir RSA, & division af FLAC.
Por FROCG i atienr a2 rete & pervs ito, Woilour FAQ's fia apen cavrepvang ad ciandcarons, of eer Sharcdards Elda Bronte Porolicetion consi caraien inthe aananes, spar chomenfs to fetes Biusaiodey com tides mam. ating HUY, off and state for wultcom To adder oorrsclides, qo ho CoMesions asemay com
Pomad fb 22,2 20 dea! | Soutites Teg 10-16 Ate
More from USATODAY
More from the web
lf You Have Ginail,., You hivel Have Ths tu
Mars Kills olritriend for reveaiing she was HEY BORG 24 ARES Oy et ote dhe getty
More Durhess Kate topless pics aut; pelice Awe pholegrapher asa yo Lee bea
Coluine: Ghesian companies can't bow to Sl miful mandate 22047 3ihar ct at tence
$ yeAsansio skip iPhone 4 Fines w94 "dae cont
Soh UL PaeTe?
fol. Uta
fret? Pe Apple's Next Gig Thing Wilt Be Huge £as
Cloud Will Never be Ghaaper Tian On- Promise: Chararel oa
How to Laad Your Aigshwacher: Comnnnd Midakas People Make arsssaen oz
4 Things You Can Learn From Sagqway’s Moterious Product Fadl ogre tate (7!
Los FOOAY Ss mie lain Paereiook Coryianls on our ctoias asd gig padis fo picradié ad enhanced asecexoscanca, Mg aoe orient, 6g lata Facabogs aod tht “dod pou ceutatent Fo tegort cpa er abuse, cligie tg OO en the aan ight merle of iae peal beg, Coded aye, eed eA and Conarsoton Giicellaes
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 79
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 80 of 130 Page ID #:856
EXHIBIT D
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 80
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 81 o0f130 Page ID #:85/
\pok fidlice IDs Alegedh Stolen From FBi Laptop | Threet Level | Wired.com Threat Leve! Privacy, Crime and Security Online Hacks and Cracks Cybersecurity
Basins Seleuns 1 Million Apple Device IDs Allegedly Stolen From FBI Laptop
By Kim ZetterEmail Author 09.04,12 12:49 PM
oe cre aa
eet
73 ate SE ie hal aa _
2 5 eee : a . ae te ate : ate eee Bane
ay z ae P| “bee Ai.
Photo: Wired
The hacker group AntiSec has released 1 million Apple device [Ds that they say they obtained from an FBI computer they hacked.
The hackers say they actnally stole 12 million [Ds, including personal information, from the hacked FBI computer, but released only 1 million in an encrypted file published on torrent sites. In a lengthy post online, the hackers wrote that last March, they hacked a laptop belonging to an FBI agent named Christopher K. Stang) from the bureau’s Regional Cyber Action Team and the New York FBI office’s Evidence Response Team.
The hackers say the [Ds were stored in a file on Stangl’s desktop titled
“NCFTA_iOS devices_intel.csv.”
witec.com/itnealiey el/,../hackersselesse-1 -milbon-apple-dev ice-ids-silagadty -stolen-(nam-fbi-faptop Wit
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 81
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 82 of 130 Page I/D #:858
AppiyGavice be Afeged|y Siolen From FRE Lepiep | Thea! Level | Wired.cam
The file, according to the hackers, contained a list of more than 12 million Apple iOS devices, including Unique Device Identifiers (UDID), user names, names of devices, types of devices, Apple Push Notification Service tokens, ZIP codes, cellphone numbers, and addresses. The hackers released only 1 million UDIDs, however, and did not release the accompanying personal information for the IDs.
Apple UDIDs are a 4o-character alphanumeric string that is unique to each Apple device.
It’s not known why the FBI possessed the Apple IDs. The hackers suggested in a tweet from the the @AnonymousIRC account, that the FBI was using the information to track users.
o AnonymousiIRC Follow ik @AnanymouslRC
12,006,000 identified and tracked iOS devices, thanks FBI SSA Christopher Stang], #Antisec
3+5epi2 Reply Reweet Favorite
Stang] may have been targeted because he was on an e-mail that members of Anonymous intercepted last January. The e-mail was sent to several dozen U.S. and European law- enforcement personnel to participate in a conference call discussing efforts to investigate Anonymous and other hacking groups. The email included a cail-in number for the discussion, which members of Anonymous recorded and posted online last February.
The hackers say they released the Apple UDIDs sc that people would know that the FBI may be tracking their devices and also because, they wrote in their online post, “we think it’s the right moment to release this knowing that Appie is looking for alternatives for those UDID currently ... but well, in this case it’s too late for those concerned owners on the list.”
Apple has been crihcized for hard-coding the ID's in devices, since they can be misused by application developers and others to identify a user, when combined with other information, and track them. Last April, Apple began rejecting applications that track UDIDs.
The Next Web has created a tool for users to check if their Apple UDID is among those that the hackers released,
Related
You Might Like
Related Links by Contextly
wied, com/thraathoy elt. ihackers eleeso-4 -million-epole-dev ige ids-allagedly -etatan-t ron bi-laptop eiayi
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 82
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 83 of 130 Page ID #:859
EXHIBIT E
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 83
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 84 of 130 Page I/D
#:860
40612 AFP: Cyber defenders urged to go on the offense
*You Search Images Maps Play YouTube Wews Gmail Oecuments Calendar
Mare -
r = fore ee oe ee eee. ee
a ey ———? E r 1 - i aa - ta ry F oa
Cyber defenders urged to go on the offense
Cy Glenn Chepmen (AFPi — dd 25, 2012 Ay
LAS VEGAS — Compyier secuity champions on Vednesday were urged to hunt down and creat hackers, sples, terroists end other chad adidoers to provant devesiating lntemet Age attacks,
The first day of breings 31 2 prestigious Blask Hal enmpuler security gonna here. qpaned vath 2 former Fel eyber crime uni chief calilag i¢r a shift im defense to offanes when H comes 10 protecting networks.
“Wie need wermiars to fight aurenemics, particulary in the cyber word ight now,” Shaan Henry said ina Gack Hal keyeote preaseniallon Ina? Kicked of wih drawiaie vdeo of hostage rescue taars (rad renee
‘4 believe the threat Gorm computer netaork allack |e tha mast slgdicant threat we face ss a chillzed word, olherthan a weapon af mass destruction."
The peril grows 38 water supplles. power gids, financial transactions, and more rely on the Infemet and as modems lives Inqressingly invayve working and daying on emartghores or tablet computers, according ln Henry,
He raied of a lial of adversenes ranging from spies and wallfimded camings to dlagrunted ompieyecs with Inside knowledges of company netairks.
"Cyberis the great equalizer.” Henry sad.
“VI & $000 laptop vélh an Intemel connection anytody, anywhere in the world can atiack any vee any campany,” he continued, ‘The Laat time | checked, thai was about 2.3 bilan peaple,”
Attar 24 years of working for ike F@l, Henry in Aprh switched to the prvate seclor sé the head of
B diwston et stertup CrewdSinke specializing In cybar attack ineldent responses and Idenilfying geass.
The compuler securky Lngueiry to expand fis arsenal beyond just bullding walls, filters and other gafequards agains! ontine intriders to include watering for, and gathering Intailigarice on, Culptis “ho have slipped through,
“tts not enough to watch the perdmeter,” Henry sald, equating computer security to prolecting real word offices. "We have to be canstanily ynting; looking for bipwines.”
In te cyber wand, that wanglates Into moniteving system aci/.ities such ps whelher files have heen pccessed or changed and by whom,
“The sophisticated adversary will qe ner that teaeil and walk around, like an imvsibte man," Henry seld, “We hase ta mitigate thal threat,”
Tactics ier ighting cyber tninders should include gethering infarmalion about haw they operate and the tocis used, and then sharing the date In tha industry and with law enforcement agencies In retevahl counines.
"InteBigence la lhe key to all of this,” Henry said. "IF we Undalstand whe the adversary fs, we cen ‘ake epeciiic actions.’
Teamwork betweart mants and privala compantes means that options for responding to Identified cyber attackers can renge fom imenned netyrork sofware to political sanctions of even military sidkes, according lo Rann.
"Yoh cad’ make every schaodl, every mall, every university, end evan workplace impanalrakte,”
aan said, "We have to lack al who the adversary is and $fop thom In achance of them walking An
Black Hat founder Jaf Moss, the sell-descrbed hacker behind the nelorious Def Con qathering thot starts hase on Thursday, backed Henpy's argument,
“Maye wé need some white Biood celis oul there, companies willing {9 push (he edge and had a ptr actors,” oss sard, calling on the computer seqyrity community ig “mise the CruTRaiity! ‘
Moss Is head of security a1 the intomet Corporation far Assiqned Names and Numbers, which oversees the vores wobsite addresses,
"So, am |iLuke, or am i enh Vader, sometimes {rn not sure.” Moss quipped abcul his roles in the hacker reeim and the computer secuety induatry.
"It depends Upon which day and who asks."
Moss proposed thal cyber aitackers also be fought on fegal fonts, wilh companies taking suspected culpais to court.
“Teant ponl money, | can't raise an amy, but | can kare lewyers and they are 2imast ag good,” Muss apid. “Cine way to Sight the enamy fs you just sue them *
Hanry feared fhat [t may take an Intamet vereinn of the Infamous O14 allack tn New York Clty to Het the wodd to take the evber threat to haart.
“Wa heed 16 get down range and take them out of the fight.” Horry sald.
vava: googie. convhostednensiafparid eal eqht5ll3GCeasOoCXegt [Ol Pxdnii VBA? docikd=ONG.f14...
gu ese om
Former FA cyber crime unit chief Shawn Henry wae the keynote sptakxer al tha Black Hat tomputer secunty gathering (AFP/Getty ImagesiF bs)
12
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 84
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 85 of130 Page I/D #:861
FONE 2 ~~ AFP: Cyber defenders urged ta go an the offense "AS walbiralned, ‘well-equipped cyber waniivs you can have en impact the slakes gre high"
uns nnh Sy iS ASE. Ad agus raaenccd Bora ©
Man L simple trick & my credit score jumped 217 pts. Banks hate this!
Study counterterrorism ai AMY & receive an online colieqe degree. 4 z 4 e
t
T & Guotes,Free Guida & Consultation. Explore Your ingurafce Opbens Mow. pete oh fic rae ca Fe - ines int Ww > The Most Ellglble Singles Over 40. Try Gur Fisk Free Sipe,
Tz stn
Pry
Gain gu Add News to your Google Homepage
= =a Ce ee te ee a | io a er ee
27012 Google- Abas Goggle News - Glog - Hetp Center- Help far Publishers - Terns of Use - Piracy Polley - Googe Home
wen. googte. comhoslednawsa pratcefal eqns GCeasOoC X9g0t iO) Pxd nvvivS AdockdCNG, fid,..
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 85
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 86 of 130 Page I/D #:862
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ST. CLAIR COUNPY, ILLINOIS
LAW DIVISION GUAVA LLC, ) 7 JAMR AIT Petitioner, ) v. ) ) FILE ay COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, 3 ST. CLALS: Ne ) ; a oF Respondent. ) Nov 29 ANE ) a eee )
Aebete OUT CL Met Taek MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR DISCOVERY BEFORE SUIT TO IDENTIFY RESPONSIBLE PERSONS AND ENTITIES
1. INTRODUCTION
Through this petition for discovery, Petitioner, the owner of various private websites, seeks to learn the identities of unidentified John Does (“Does”) from Internet Service Provider (‘ISP’) Respondent Comeast Cable Communications, LLC (“Comcast”), so that Petitioner may file computer fraud and abuse and computer tampering suit against these individuals. Since Does used the Internet to commit their violations, Petitioner only knows Does by their Internet Protocol (“IP”) addresses. Does’ IP addresses were assigned to Does by Comcast. Accordingly, Comcast can usé the IP addresses to identify Does. Indeed, Comcast maintains internal logs, which record the date, time and customer identity for each EP address assignment made by Comcast. Significantly, Comcast only maintain these logs for a very short period of time.
Petitioner seeks an order requiring Comcast to respond to a subpoena that will be served it requiring Comeast to disclose the true name, address, telephone number, e-mail address and
Media Access Control (“MAC”) address’ of the Does. Petitioner will only use this information to
resolve its computer fraud and abuse and computer tampering dispute with the Does. Without
' A MAC address is a number that identifies the specific device used for the hacking activity.
I
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 86
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 87 of 130 Page ID #:863
this information, Petitioner cannot name Does in future computer fraud and abuse and computer tampering suits nor immediately serve Does to pursue any such lawsuit to protect itself.
As explained below, Petitioner is indisputably entitied to learn the identity of Does and a petition for pre-suit discovery is a proper tool for this purpose. Accordingly, this Court should grant this petition.
UI. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Petitioner operates computer systems that distribute third-party adult entertainment content. As alleged in the Petition, Petitioner has actionable claims for computer fraud and abuse and computer tampering against each of the Does. Does used hacked passwords to gain unauthorized access to Petitioner's protected computer systems.
Although Petitioner does not know Does’ true identities, Petitioner's agents identified each of the Does by a unique IP address assigned to that Doe by Comeast and the date and time of the hacking activity. Comcast maintains internal logs which record the date, time, and customer identify for each IP address assignment made. Comcast can use the IP address provided by Petitioner to identify the Does. Comcast, however, only retains the information necessary to correlate an IP address to a person for a short amour of time. Accordingly, time is of the essence with respect to getting the subpoenas to Comcast so that Comcast may preserve and maintain this information necessary to identify Does.
Hil ARGUMENT
Petitioner may obtain the identities of the Does through a petition for discovery pursuant to Dlinois Supreme Court Rule 224. A petition for discovery before suit to identify responsible persons and entities may be used by “[a] person or entity who wishes to engage in discovery for
the sole purpose of ascertaining the identity of one who may be responsible in damages .. .” 134
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 87
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 88 of 130 Page ID #:864
Hil. 2d R, 224. (Linois courts grant petitions for pre-suit discovery when, like in the present case, the identities of the defendants are unknown to the plaintiff. John Gaynor v. Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway, 750 N.E.2d 307, 312 (Hi. App. Ct. 2001) (“Rule 224’s use is appropriate in situations where a plaintiff has suffered injury but does not know the identity of one from whom recovery may be sought.”); Reth v. St. Elizabeth's Hospital, 607 N.E.2d 1356, 136] (U1. App. Ct. 1993) (“[Rule 224] provides a tool by which a person or entity may, with leave of court, compel limited discovery before filing a lawsuit in an effort to determine the identity of one who may be liable in damages.”) (Quoting 134 Il. 2d R. 224, Committee Comments, at 188-89)).
The “identity” that Petitioner is entitled to ascertain is more than just the names of the unknown Does. John Gaynor, 750 N.E.2d at 312 (“on occasion, the identification of a defendant may require more than simply a name and that, on those occasions, discovery under Rule 224 1s not limited to the petitioner’s ascertainment of a name only.” (Citing Beale v. EdgeMark Financial Cerp., 664 N.E.2d 302 (IL App. Ct. 1996)). Petitioner requires this additional information,’ because sometimes the Internet subscriber and the actual hacker are determined to not be one and the same.” Petitioner needs all the identifying information it seeks to make this determination.
Further, Petitioner is not precluded from the information it seeks simply because it is aware of the Does’ IP addresses. The court in Beale explains that the pre-sutt discovery 1s not
precluded “sclely on the basis of the petitioner’s knowledge of a name only.” 664 N.E.2d at 307.
* The address, telephone number, ¢-mail address, and Media Access Control address of each account holder.
* For instance, an individual who lives alone with a secure wireless Internet connection is very likely to be both the account hoider and the hacker. In contrast, where the account holder is, for example, the wife of the household it is more likely the case—given the nature of Petitioner’s business—that the husband or a college-aged son 1s the appropriate hacker. In other words, in the latter example the account holder and the hacker are most likely not the same individual.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 88
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 89 of 130 Page ID #:865
Knowledge of the Does’ IP addresses does not provide Petitioner with sufficient information to name and bring a lawsuit against them. If mere knowledge of the defendant’s name is not enough to preclude pre-suit discovery under Rule 224, then mere knowledge of the Does’ IP address is also not enough to preclude the pre-suit discovery.
In short, Petitioner is using the petition for pre-suit discovery for its intended purpose: to identify the names of the people who have harmed it. There is no legal or equitable reason why Petitioner should be prohibited from seeking the Does’ identities from Comcast.
IV. CONCLUSION
For all the forgoing reasons, the Court shouid enter an order granting this petition.
Respecthully submitted, Guava LLC
DATED: November 16, 2012
Paul A. Duffy, Esq. (Bar No. 6210496} 2N. LaSalle Street
13th Floor
Chicago, LL 66602
312-952-6136
Attorney for Petitioner
By:
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 89
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 90 of 130 Page ID #:866
py. KHOU,
Kevin T. Hoermer, #6196686 Becker, Paulson, Hoerner & Thompson, P.C.
5111 West Main Street Belleville, IL 62226
(618) 235-0020
Attorney for Petitioner
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 90
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 91 o0f130 Page I/D #:867
ki w 3
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCOIT ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS
LAW DIVISION GUAVA LLC, ) Petitioner, Ne a m R “] i f v. } COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, Respondent.
ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR DISCOVERY BEFORE SUIT TO IDENTIFY RESPONSIBLE PERSONS AND ENTITIES
THIS CAUSE, having come before this Court on Petitioner’s Petition for Discovery before Suit to identify Responsible Persons and Entities (“Petitton”)}, and the Court having reviewed said Petition, the Memorandum of Law filed in support thereof, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it 1s hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
iP The Petition is GRANTED.
2. Petitioner may serve Respondent Comcast Cable Communications LLC (“Comcast”) with a subpoena commanding Comcast to provide Petitioner with the true name, address, telephone number, e-mail address, Media Access Control (“MAC”) address for each of the John Does (“Does”) to whom Comeast assigned an Internet Protocol (“IP”) address as set forth on Exhibit A to the Petition. Petitioner shall attach to any such subpoena a a of this Order. Comeast shall comply with it the subpoena issued pursuant to this Order.
c% Comcast shali not require Petitioner to pay a fee in advance of providing the subpoenaed information; nor shail Comcast require Petitioner to pay a fee for an IP address that is not controlled by Comcast, or for duplicate IP addresses that resolve to the same individual, or
l
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 91
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 92 of 130 Page ID #:868
for an IP address that does not provide the name of a unique individual or for Comcast’s internal costs to notify its customers. If necessary, the Court shall resolve any disputes between Comcast and Petitioner regarding the reasonableness of the amount proposed to be charged by Comcast after the subpoenaed information is provided to Petitioner.
4, Petitioner may only use the information disclosed in response to a subpoena seryed on Comcast for the purpose of identifying the unknown Does so Petitioner can protect
and enforce its rights as set forth in its Petition.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at St. Clair County, I[iimois this
day of , 2012.
CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 92
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 93 of 130 Page ID #:869
KAHIBIT V
EXHIBIT V Supplemental Exhibits - Page 93
Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 94 o0f130 Page ID #:870
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS
GUAVA, LLC, Case Number: 12-MR-417
Petitioner, Assigned to Honorable Andrew J. Gleeson
V.
COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, . LLC, Hearing Date: February 21, 2013
Hearing Time: 11:00 A.M. Respondent. Hearing Place: Courtroom 404, County Bldg., Belleville, IL
CONSOLIDATED REPLY IN SUPPORT OF JOHN DOES’ MOTIONS TO QUASH
The oppositions filed in this matter only make it increasingly clear that this case is but the
latest example of intentional fraud on the Court by the attorneys associated with Prenda Law, Inc. (a) Fraud on the Court
First, it 1s irrefutable that there are at least two obvious lies contained 1n plaintiff's Rule 224 Petition. Paragraph 6 of the Petition sates, in no uncertain terms, and not on information and belief, that ““Venue 1s proper because at least one of the John Doe Defendants resides in St. Clair County, Illinois. Further, Comcast transacts business in St. Clair County, Illinois.” Petition 4 6. As shown by the spreadsheet prepared by Comcast, attached hereto as Exhibit R (table showing IP addresses by county)’, this statement, which was verified under penalty of perjury (although by whom is anyone’s guess) is 100% false. According to Comcast’s records, not a single John Doe defendant actually resides in St. Clair County. There is a simple reason for this: Comcast does not transact business in St. Clair County—Charter is the franchised cable operator in the area. Making a stretch argument to try and find a home for a case in St. Clair County is one thing. Resorting to outright fraud to achieve that goal is another. This is no mere mistake. Particularly in
view of all the other suspiciously convenient “mistakes” Prenda appears to have made in this case,
' The Exhibit lettering used here is continued from the Exhibits to the Declaration of Morgan E. Pietz re: Prenda Law, Inc, which filed by Mr. Pietz in connection with his Motion to Quash. _|-
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 94
Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 95 of 130 Page ID #:871
and its sordid record of fraud on various other Courts around the country, this Court should see past any excuse of mere incompetence and recognize this as an intentional and deliberate fraud.
Second, beyond the lie used to establish jurisdiction and venue, the entire petition action and everything that has flowed from it is all a fraud, because the petition 1s fraudulently verified. More than a month ago, attorney Thomas Leverso, on behalf of a John Doe, filed a Rule 237 Petition and related Order to Show Cause pointing out the myriad reasons the verification filed in this case is not credible. In response to these very serious allegations that Prenda has filed yet another’ fraudulent verification, this time here in this action, Prenda has repeated its usual playbook of ignoring the problem for as long as possible, making procedural objections, and then trying to explain a fraud as some kind of clerical error. The verification appears to say “Alan Moay,” and as Mr. Leverso noted in his Rule 237 Petition, etc., that is a bogus name; according to an investigator using national databases, there is no record of anyone in the United States with such a name.
Prenda’s new story, per its opposition to Mr. Leverso’s Rule Petition, is that the verification does not say “Alan Moay,” rather, it says “Alan Mony.” Opp to Leverson Motion, p. 5. First of all, this, too, 1s false. The verification very clearly says “Alan Moay.” Prenda has been requested to bring the original verification document to the next hearing to settle this argument; but if past 1s prologue, it won’t. See Exhibit S (post 2/13 meet and confer email chain).
More importantly though, 1t now appears that “Alan Mony,” the supposed new name of the verifying “client,” is also a bogus name. The same kind of national database search which revealed that there is no “Alan Moay” in the U.S. yields the same results for “Alan Mony”; it’s a bogus name; there 1s no record of any such person. Exhibit T (investigator report on “Alan Mony”’). The closest name anywhere in the U.S. is for an “Allan Mony” with two I|’s. Jd. What does ring a bell though, as far as Prenda goes, is the name “Allan Mooney.” A man named “Allan
Mooney” has previously been listed as the manager of MCGIP, LLC, one of Prenda’s earlier
* Another example of a fraudulent verification filed by Prenda, supposedly signed by “Alan Cooper” was attached as Exhibit L to the Dec’! of Morgan E. Pietz. That verification, along with various copyright assignment agreements also supposedly signed by “Alan Cooper” on behalf of Prenda sham entities, 1s the subject of the scathing Order to Show Cause re: Sanctions from Judge Wright of the Central District of California, a copy of which was lodged with this Court at the last hearing. See Ingenuity 13, LLC v. John Doe , C.D. Cal. No. 12-cv-8333, ECF No. 48.
2.
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 95
Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 96 of 130 Page ID #:8/2
mysterious shell company plaintiffs (which Prenda’s lawyers probably own). See Exhibit U, (Minnesota Secretary of State business entity detail for MCGIP, LLC.) According to the Minnesota Secretary of State, the official address for MCGIP, LLC is “care of Alpha Law Group,” at Alpha law’s office in Minnesota. Alpha Law Group is the newest firm name being used by John Steele’s former (current?) law partner Paul Hansemeier, who 1s also the brother of Prenda’s current preferred technical expert Pete Hansemeier.’ Further, a man using the email address “amooney29@gmail.com” is apparently involved in the online adult entertainment business, per a Adult Industry News article where Allan Mooney was selling the domain name <orgasms.com>, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit V. Finally, one “Alan Mooney” is also a current client of Alpha Law / Paul Hansemeier, in Mooney v. Priceline.Com Incorporated et al., No. 12-cv- 02731-DWE-JSM (D. Minn. Oct. 26, 2012). Exhibit W (Hennepin County, Minnesota, complaint listing Paul Hansemeier of Alpha Law Firm LLC as attorney of record for plaintiff “Alan Mooney’’).
After Prenda’s newest story was learned by defense counsel the morning of the 2/13 hearing in this matter,” Prenda’s past connections to a man named “Allan Mooney” were pointed out to Prenda in follow up attempt meet and confer emails. Specifically, Prenda’s past history with “Allan Mooney” was detailed, and all three of Prenda’s lawyers in this case were asked to confirm that the new story was that the person who verified the petition spells his name “Alan Mony.” Prenda’s response, in its entirety (by way of Mr. Hoerner) was “The issues have already been briefed. See you in court.” Accordingly, Mr. Hoerner was then advised that since he was the only
one who had signed the opposition stating that the affiants name is “Alan Mony” the defendants
* For background on how John Setele and Paul Hansemeier’s firm started this scheme as Steele Hansemeier, PLLC, but then rebranded as Prenda Law, Inc., refer to the Declaration of Morgan E. Pietz re: Prenda Law, Inc., 9] 5—13.
* This brings up yet another fraud in this case: the proofs of service on Prenda’s oppositions. Attorney Morgan Pietz, at least, never received a copy of the opposition that was supposedly mailed to him on February 11, 2013. Just whose name 1s on that proof of service anyway? While this kind of thing is not usually worth making a fuss over, with Prenda, it is part of a pattern, and, unfortunately, completely typical.
> All of the other oppositions, other than the one where Prenda says the name of the client is really “Alan Mony” were signed by Paul Duffy of Chicago. Presumably, Mr. Hoerner signed the =e
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 96
Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 97 of 130 Page ID #:8/3
would proceed on the assumption that this spelling was correct, but would seek costs and fees if Prenda later decided to try and change its story, given the refusal to meet and confer on the issue.
As noted in Mr. Pietz’s motion, and supporting declaration, this is not the first time that very serious questions have been raised about Prenda using false names to sign to Court documents, including verifications and declarations offered under penalty of perjury. Pietz Motion, p. 8; Dec’l. of Morgan E. Pietz re: Prenda Law, Inc., 4] 29-42. In fact, this 1s not even the first time that Prenda, after being accused of fraud on the Court, has responded to that fraud with more fraud; an example which also involved Prenda’s misspelling of the name of the supposed affiant. In Sunlust Pictures, LLC v. Nguyen, M.D. Fl. No. 12-cv-1685, Prenda attempted to perpetrate another fraud on the Court (holding out John Steele’s former paralegal as a “principal” of Sunlust Pictures), all as stated in the hearing transcript attached as Exhibit N to the Dec’I. of Morgan E. Pietz re: Prenda Law, Inc. In an attempt to explain that fraud, Prenda ended up submitting a fraudulent declaration, where the person signing 1t supposedly misspelled his own name on the signature line. The true principal of Sun/ust is named Daniel Weber; but the first declaration which he supposedly signed, and which Prenda filed in their response to the sanctions motion spelled it “Webber” with to b’s. The first declaration was also full of other lies (1.e., that Weber was out of the US during the hearing he had been ordered to attend), which defense counsel there immediately pointed out. Eventually, actual Daniel Weber did file a corrected declaration attempting to explain away his (attorney’s) lies in the previous declaration. The fraudulent first declaration, which attempted to explain the fraud on the court, 1s now the subject of a second sanctions motion. Sunlust Pictures, LLC v. Nguyen, M.D. Fl. No. 12-cv-1685 (ECF No. 46, 12/31/13) attached hereto as Exhibit X. (b) Merits of Movants’ Objections to Plaintiff's Rule 224 Petition
Plaintiff's oppositions have no retort to the argument, made by Mr. Pietz in his motion to quash, that use of a Rule 224 petition here 1s unnecessary because the plaintiffs are already
sufficiently identified (by I.P. address) that they can be sued for damages without resort to Rule
opposition (to Mr. Leverso’s motion) containing the name “Alan Mony” so that Prenda can pretend there was some transcription error on the spelling over the phone, to explain why it 1s that Prenda has misspelled the name of the purported verifying client for a second time 1n this case, after being accused of fraud on that issue.
_4-
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 97
Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 98 of 130 Page ID #:874
224 discovery. On its face, Rule 224 is narrowly limited to situations where discovery is “necessary,” and Gaynor v. Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway, 750 N.E.2d 307 (2001) clarifies that if a plaintiff has enough information already to sue for damages, Rule 224 discovery should be denied. Here, as in Gaynor, the existence of a parallel action for damages (here, the Lightspeed case) conclusively proves that Rule 224 discovery is not a “condition precedent” to filing a complaint for damages. Even if we accept plaintiffs dubious representation that Guava, LLC has “has no corporate or other relation” to Lightspeed Media Corporation (Opp. to Leverso Motion, p. 1), 1t does not matter. Regardless of whether Lighspeed and Guava are the same entity or not, the bottom line is that Prenda has already proven conclusively, through the Lightspeed case, that in its view, Prenda can file a complaint against a single John Doe defendant, identified only by IP address, and then make its case using the regular discovery provisions of Rule 201. If suing a John Doe identified by solely by IP address for damages was sufficient for Prenda in Lightspeed, why is Rule 224 discovery now suddenly a “condition precedent” to filing the exact same kind of suit here now? Prenda has filed hundreds of complaints for damages, based on an IP address alone; its new position that it now believes Rule 224 discovery 1s required before it can file such complaints is another misrepresentation made in bad faith.
Movants cited chapter and verse, black letter law, that when considering a Rule 224 Petition, the Court should apply a Section 2-615 analysis to the claims at issue. See, e.g., Pietz Motion, pp. 9. Having established that proposition, movants then cited a slew of CFAA cases’ all of which clearly establish that plaintiffs claims do not pass muster under a Section 2-615 analysis. See, e.g., Pietz Motion, pp. 16—20. Plaintiff responded to this array of authority in its opposition with a bit of a curveball. Rather than argue that the allegations in the Petition state a valid claim under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, plaintiff instead premises its argument on the notion that a Section 2-615 analysis of the underlying claim is not required in a Rule 224 petition action. Simply put, plaintiff needs to (re?)-read the many cases cited by movants which establish this poin as black letter law. The closest plaintiff comes to a coherent argument on this issue is the observation that many of the Rule 224 cases cited by movants involved underlying claims for ° No cases were needed on the Computer Tampering claim; the relief sought here 1s barred on the face of the statute itself, since there are no allegations of a virus or malware. See Pietz Motion, pp.
19-20. 25
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 98
Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 99 of 130 Page ID #:875
defamation, rather than underlying claims for CFAA or Computer Tampering violations. So what? The point of general standards for analysis is that they can be used in different circumstances. Whatever the underlying claim at issue, the law is clear that the applicable analysis that should be applied to Rule 224 petitions is a Rule 2-615 analysis. Plaintiffs are correct to note that “illegal hacking is not protected by the First Amendment;” however, neither, for that matter, is defamation protected by the First Amendment. Plaintiff's entire argument on the Section 2-615 analysis makes no sense and should be viewed as a tacit admission that the allegations in the Petition, if true, could not state a causes of action for CFAA or Computer Tampering.
One argument plaintiff does engage with in the oppositions is movants point that the petition is overbroad insofar as it requests phone numbers, emails and MAC addresses. As argued in Mr. Pietz’s motion, Rule 224 petitions are limited to information needed to identify defendants, and in most cases, a name and address is sufficient for that purpose. Here, plaintiff wants the phone numbers, emails and MAC addresses not to identify potential defendants, but because it wants to hold Internet subscribers responsible for infringement.’ But Rule 224 does not permit discovery to reach blame or liability; it is limited to identification of a potential defendant. Movants cite cases standing for the proposition that this means a name and address, no more. Plaintiff cites no authority suggesting that phone numbers, emails, or MAC addresses are appropriate information for a Rule 224 Petition, and there is none.
(c) Response to Plaintiffs Counter Arguments in the Oppositions
Plaintiff's main responsive counter-argument is that movants supposedly do not have standing to challenge a subpoena seeking their identifying information. First, this argument ignores this Court’s December 12, 2012 order, which explicitly grants ISP subscribers like movants an opportunity to object this petition action. Second, Rule 224, on its face, provides for a required hearing. Third, this Court was correct to invite movants to object, because movants absolutely do have standing to object to the release of their identifying information to a litigant engaged in a fraudulent, extortionate enterprise. Even if plaintiffs were acting in good faith, and
this entire action was not predicated on various frauds, movants would still have standing to object
’ See also the copy of the Guava, LLC extortion letter being used in this case, which was lodged with the Court at the 2/13 hearing. a
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 99
(Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 100 of 130 Page | #:8/6
to the release of their information. As expounded in further detail in Mr. Leverso’s motion (pp. 2- 5), movants here do have standing to object. The court need only look at essentially any reported appellate case on Rule 224 petitions ever decided to verify this proposition; the challenging party is almost always the third party about whom information is being sought (1.e., the real party in interest), not the respondent with the records. Like a subpoena, the Rule 224 petition, seeks to infringe upon movants legitimate interests to be free of oppression, embarrassment, or undue burden. See Bush v. Catholic Diocese, 351 Ill.App.3d 588, 591, 814 N.E.2d 135 (3d Dist. 2004); United States v. Ranieri, 670 F .2d 702,772 (7th Cir. 1982) accord Special Mkts. Ins. Consultants, Inc. v. Lynch, Case No. 11 C 9181, 2012 WLI565348 (N.D. Il. May 2, 2012).
Plaintiff's other featured argument, that movants do not have “approval to proceed anonymously,” 1s a complete red herring. As the court rightly noted at the February 13, 2013 hearing with respect to the in pro per litigant 1n attendance, the main issue being litigated right now is whether the Movants should be identified to the plaintiff. The time to brief the issue anonymous participation in judicial proceedings, and the potential limited use of a “John Doe” pseudonym for purposes of the public docket, is after the court determines whether Movants should be identified in the first place and if these people are actually sude for damages. Either the Court is going to deny the petition so that no information 1s disclosed, or it is going to order that Comcast identify the Movants to the plaintiff. Plaintiffs position that ‘in order to object to plaintiff's subpoena seeking to identify you, you need to first identify yourself to the plaintiff’ 1s plainly a Catch 22 that makes no sense.
Most of the balance of plaintiff’s oppositions amount to little more than personal attacks on certain of the defense attorneys involved in this action. With respect to the attacks on Mr. Pietz, Judge Wright’s order from the Central District of California, relating to a series of related cases where Mr. Pietz was very involved, speaks for itself. Ingenuity 13, LLC v. John Doe , C.D. Cal. No. 12-cv-8333, ECF No. 48 (copy lodged with the Court at the 2/13 hearing). Since that order has been issued, Paul Duffy (counsel here) and Prenda Law have more or less dismissed all Ingenuity 13 and AF Holdings cases in California, and most of them across the country—which
could perhaps be viewed as a tacit admission that all of Prenda’s AF Holdings and Ingenuity 13
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 100
(Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 101 of 130 Page | #:877
cases were also fraudulent upon inception—just like the fraudulently verified petition full of lies about venue and jurisdiction currently before this Court.
Finally, the extortion letter from Brett Gibbs,® as “in house counsel for Guava, LLC,” clarifies what the movants have suspected all along: that this case 1s not really a ‘password hacking’ CFAA case, but a BitTorrent copyright infringement case in disguise. Mr. Gibbs’ letter makes clear that really, the gravamen of the complaint against the John Does 1s not that they breached a computer network; its that they engaged in file-sharing on BitTorrent (which 1s possibly copyright infringement, but not computer fraud). This only lends further support to the notion that this whole suit is a transparent attempt to abuse this Court’s jurisdiction, and the Rule 224 process, to seek the kind of discovery that Prenda is now routinely denied in copyright infringement cases in federal court. Again, Prenda has told the Court one thing—.e., that it wants to sue people under the CFAA—but then done another—.e., try and then use the subpoena return info to bring claims for copyright infringement.
(d) Conclusion
The kind of abuse Prenda Law is up to—lying about jurisdiction and venue, systemic filing of bogus verifications and other documents, filing claims that cannot withstand even basic legal scrutiny, pressuring people to “settle” when it knows many such people are probably totally innocent—undermine the very integrity of the legal system. These missteps are not mistakes. They are part of a calculated scheme that, even without all of the fraud, comes very close to extortion. However, the Declaration of Morgan E. Pietz makes clear that his case 1s part of a systemic, calculated national conspiracy, which (particularly if Alan Cooper’s allegations of identity theft prove true) may very well be a criminal enterprise. Accordingly, movants respectfully request that this court follow Judge Wright’s lead, and come down on Prenda Law like a ton of bricks. Prenda’s various frauds on various courts—including this one—have gone on for long enough. The Rule 224 subpoena should be denied as to the movants, and the next and final issue the Court should then consider is awarding sanctions and attorneys fees.
As of 12:00 noon PST on Friday February 15, 2013, undersigned counsel is authorized to
report that in addition to Mr. Pietz’s clients with IP address numbers 71.229.73.180 and
* This letter is the second document lodged with the Court at the February 13, 2013 hearing. see
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 101
Vase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 102 of 130 Page | #:878
67.162.81.65; attorney Thomas Leverso, on behalf of his client with I.P. address number 68.58.68.84; attorney Earl Hubbs, on behalf of his client with IP address number 24.14.130.85; and attorney Holly A. Reese on behalf of her client with IP address number 79.29.36.240; all join
in this consolidated reply.
Respectfully submitted, DATED: February 15, 2013,
Morgan E. Pietz (CA Bar No. 260629)* THE PIETZ LAW FIRM
3770 Highland Ave., Ste. 206 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Telephone: (310) 424-5557 Facsimile: (310) 546-5301
* Pro Hac Vice
Attorney for Movants
Laura K. Beasley (IL Bar No. 6274537)
JOLEY, NUSSBAUMER, OLIVER, DICKERSON & BEASLEY, P.C.
8 East Washington Street
Belleville, Illinois 62220
Tel: (618) 235-2020
Fax: (618) 235-9632
Local Counsel for Movants
CERTIFICATE/PROOF OF SERVICE
On this day, I, on oath, state that I on this day I served this notice and true and accurate copies of the above documents by personal service and/or mailing copies to each entity to whom they were directed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, proper postage prepaid in full, at a U.S. Postal Depository on this day before the hour of 4:00 p.m.
Dated: February 15, 2013
Morgan E. Pietz (CA Bar No. 260629)* THE PIETZ LAW FIRM
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 102
(ase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 103 of 130 Page | #:879
Kevin T. Hoerner
BECKER, PAULSON, HOERNER & THOMPSON, P.C.
5111 West Main Street
Belleville, IL 62226
Paul Duffy
PRENDA LAW, INC.
2 North LaSalle Street, 13" Floor Chicago, IL 60602
Attorneys for Petitioner
Comcast Cable Communications, LLC c/o Subpoena Response Team
650 Centerton Road
Moorestown, NJ 08057
In-House Legal For Respondent
John D. Siever
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE 1919 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006-3401
Outside Counsel for Respondent Andrew Toennies
714 Locust Street
St. Louis, MO 63101
Local Counsel for Respondent
SERVICE LIST
Laura K. Beasley (IL Bar No. 6274537) JOLEY, NUSSBAUMER, OLIVER,
& BEASLEY, P.C.
8 East Washington Street
Belleville, Illinois 62220
Thomas V. Leverso
LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS V. LEVERSO 33 West Higgins Road, Suite 3080
South Barrington, IL 6001
Erin K. Russell
THE RUSSELL FIRM
23 South Wacker Drive, 84th Floor Chicago, IL 60606
Earl Hubbs
RICK REED
6464 West Main, Suite 1B Belleville, IL 62223
Annie Bode Callahan
SMITH AMUNDSEN
12312 Olive Boulevard, Suite 100 St. Louis, MO 63141
Holly A. Reese
GOLDENBERG HELLER ANTOGNOLI & ROWAND, P.C.
2227 South State Route 157
P.O. Box 959
Edwardsville, Illinois 62025
Attorneys for ISP Subscribers
_10-
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 103
1
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 104 of 130 Page ID
TICKET
Li
431811 431812 431813
431815 431816 431817 431818 431819 431820 431821 431822 431824 431825 431826 431827 431828 431829 431830 431831 431832 431834 431835
431837 431838 431839 431840 431841 431842 431845 431846 431847
431849 431850 431851 431852 431853 431854 431855 431856 431857 431858 431859 431860 431861 431862 4314863 431864 431865 431866 431867 431868 431869 431870
431873
-24.1.107.63
24.14.168.183
431871
# |P ADDRESS
24.1.191.211 24.1.141.155
24.1.75.199 24.12.113.158 24.1.95.156 24,1.98.146 24.12.116.87 24.12.160.43 24.12.160.5 24.12.17.76 24.12.235,189 24.12.215.82 24.12.255.78 24.12,30.72 24.12.9.239 24.13.103.83 24.13.118.250 24.13.137.179 24.13.164.156 24.13.172.38 24.13.178.197
24.13.235.108 24.13.59.132 24,14.103.125 24.14.116.211 24.14.122.52 24.14.13.193 24.14.130.85 24.14.162.27
24.14.188.2 24.14.191.2 24.14.191.209 24.14.211.234 24,14.22.26 24.14.226.226 24.14.50.22 24.15.0.234 24.15.108.237 24.15,188.130 24.15.194.37 24.15.21.54 24.15.225.33 24.15.29.44 24,15.48.154 24.15.94.96 24.63.77.213 24.7.197.117 24.7.199.112 24,7.214.221 50.129. 14.36 50.129.252.207 50.129.68.62
50.129.92.32
_ ROCKFORD
CUSTOMER CITY
So eee " d L t
EVANSTON CHICAGO SPRINGFIELD
DECATUR
MOUNT PROSPECT
CHICAGO CHICAGO CHICAGO
BUFFALO GROVE ROLLING MEADOWS
CHICAGO LIBERTYVILLE EVANSTON CHICAGO AURORA CHICAGO CHICAGO CHICAGO CHICAGO
SCHAUMBURG ARLINGTON HEIGHTS SCHAUMBURG
CHICAGO CHICAGO DEKALB BENSENVILLE MUNDELEIN CHICAGO NORRIDGE CHICAGO GLEN ELLYN GLEN ELLYN GLEN ELLYN NEW LENOX
ADDISON
NEW LENOX OAK PARK
WILLOWBROOK
GREST HILL
DOWNERS GROVE
DEERFIELD BELLWOOD MUNDELEIN GHAMPAIGN OAK PARK LOCKPORT
CHESTNUT HILL
CHAMPAIGN CHAMPAIGN
WESTMONT
CHICAGO CHICAGO
DEKALB
HIGHLAND PARK
#:880
COOK IL COOK iL SANGAMON ee dille
MACON IL
COOK IL COOK iL COOK IL COOK It COOK IL COOK IL COOK IL LAKE tL COOK IL COOK IL KANE, DUPAGE, ETC IL COOK IL COOK IL COOK It COOK IL DUPAGE IL COOK, LAKE IL
DUPAGE iL
LAKE IL
COOK IL COOK IL DEKALB IL DUPAGE IL LAKE IL. COOK IL COOK IL
COOK (L
DUPAGE (L
DUPAGE IL DUPAGE IL WILL IL DUPAGE IL WILL IL COOK IL DUPAGE IL WILL IL DUPAGE iL LAKE IL COOK [L COOK IL CHAMPAIGN IL COOK IL WILL IL MIDDLESEX MA CHAMPAIGN IL CHAMPAIGN IL DUPAGE IL COOK IL COOK IL
WINNEBAGO IL
WINNEBAGO
431874 §0.140.131.57 ADDISON DUPAGE IL HIGHLIGHT = GEO-CODED RESULTS ONLY ALL OTHERS FROM ACCOUNT RECORDS 1
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 104
_ Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 105 of 130 Page ID
TICKET # IP ADDRESS
CUSTOMER CITY
#:881
CUSTOMER COUNTY CUSTOMER STATE
431875 §0.140.165.240 CHICAGO
431877 50.140.178.114 BOLINGBROOK
431878 50.141.247.73 DEKALB 431879 = §0.141.173.240 CHICAGO 431880 50.141.215.254 BROOKFIELD 431881 50.441.254.153 FORT WAYNE 431882 50.77.161.249 CHICAGO 431883 = 67.162.108.239 CHICAGO 431884 67.162.29.173 DEKALB 431885 67.162.29.246 DEKALB 431886 67.162.38.22 CHICAGO 431887 67.162.39.33 CHICAGO 431888 67.162.47.179 WAUKEGAN 431889 67.162.51.34 WORTH 431880 67.162.81.65 CHICAGO 431891 67,163.4.99 DEKALB 431892 67.163.69.45 COUNTRYSIDE 431893 67.163.76.75 ORLAND PARK 431894 67.163.89.166 JOLIET
431895 67.163.9.43 MOUNT PROSPECT
431896 67.165.167.146 BARTLETT
)
67.165.179.58
431898 CHICAGO
431909 67.165.182.136 CHICAGO 431910 67.165.183.182 CHICAGO 431911 867.167.112.222 GLEN ELLYN 431912 67.167.13.9 QUINCY 431913 67.167.13.99 QUINCY | 431915 67.167.210.178 CHICAGO 431916 67.167.246.116 WARRENVILLE 431917 867.173.104.228 WAUKEGAN 431918 67.173.113.134 WOODRIDGE 431919 67.173.142.217 WESTMONT 431920 67.173.41.116 LOMBARD 431921 67.173.67.242 ROLLING MEADOWS 431922 67.173.71.42 CHICAGO 431923 67.173.81.33 PALATINE 431924 67.173.94.229 WAUKEGAN 431925 67.174.12.22 RIVER FOREST 431926 67.174.24.44 ITASCA
431927 67.174.3.197 CHANNAHON
mA pe r
MELROSE PARK
hy
431930 67.175.164.253
431931 67.175.167.179 CHICAGO
431932 67.175.201.238 CHICAGO
431933 67.175.219.14 DEKALB
431934 67.175.225.135 SCHILLER PARK 431935 67.175,.34.7 WESTERN SPRINGS
431936 67.175.45.113 CHICAGO |
431938 67.176.150.212 CHICAGO
431940 67.175.7.224 CHICAGO
431942 67.176.153.52 LAKE IN THE HILLS 431943 67.176.182.107 BLOOMINGTON 431944 67.184.1.244 LISLE
431945 67.184.166.20 ALGONQUIN 431946 67.184.177.95 CHICAGO
431947 67.784.228.60 WEST DUNDEE 431948 67.184.24.103 NORTH AURORA
HIGHLIGHT = GEO-CODED RESULTS ONLY ALL OTHERS FROM ACCOUNT RECORDS
~ COOK
WILL
COOK IL WILL, DUPAGE IL DEKALB IL COOK IL COOK IL ALLEN IN COOK IL COOK IL DEKALB IL DEKALB IL COOK IL COOK IL LAKE IL COOK IL COOK IL DEKALB IL COOK IL COOK IL WILL, KENDALL lt COOK IL
‘COOK
COOK COOK DUPAGE ADAMS ADAMS |
DUPAGE LAKE DUPAGE DUPAGE DUPAGE COOK COOK COOK LAKE COOK DUPAGE
COOK COOK COOK DEKALB COOK COOK COOK
COOK
COOK
KANE,DUPAGE,COOK IL
IL MCHENRY IL MCLEAN IL DUPAGE IL MCHENRY, KANE iL COOK IL KANE tL. KANE [L
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 105
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 106 of 130 Page ID a #:882
TICKET # IP ADDRESS CUSTOMER CITY
CUSTOMER COUNTY CUSTOMER STATE
431949 67.184.86.237 ROSELLE DUPAGE, COOK IL 431950 67.186.127.41 BOLINGBROOK WILL, DUPAGE IL 431951 67.186.83.184 ORLAND PARK COOK IL 437952 67.196.86.5 DANVILLE VERMILION IL 431953 67.186.92.192 CAROL STREAM DUPAGE [L 431954 68.51.99.159 ELGIN KANE, COOK IL. 431955 68.57.197.175 NORRIDGE COOK IL 431956 68.57.219.140 CHICAGO COOK IL 437957 68.57.231.126 ROCKFORD WINNEBAGO IL 431958 68.57.233.25 CHICAGO COOK I 431959 68.58.155.157 CHICAGO COOK IL. 431960 68.58.68.84 ROCKFORD WINNEBAGO IL 431961 69.136.14.225 DECATUR MACON IL 431962 69.136.9.65 DECATUR MACON IL 431963 69.245.251.141 CHICAGO COOK IL.
431964 WAUCONDA LAKE | IL
(AIO 5 |: We i,
69.246.215.8
E
431967 71.194.120.232 PALATIN COOK IL
431968 771.194.185.170 CHICAGO COOK IL. 431969 741.194.189.101 STREAMWOOD COOK IL 431970 771.194.248.838 NEW LENOX WILL IL. 431971 971.194.4768 NEW LENOX WILL IL 431972 71.194.6.203 AURORA KANE, KENDALL, ETCIL 431973 71.194.75.167 SCHILLER PARK COOK IL 431974 71.194.76.21 ROSELLE DUPAGE, COOK IL
431975 71.194.86.35 SKOKIE COOK IL
431978 71.201.20.218 CHICAGO COOK YL
431979 71.201.200.210 BERWYN COOK IL 431981 = 71,201.225.111 BELLWOOD COOK IL
431982 71,201.240.10 ROMEOVILLE
- F 7 1
WILL IL
431984 741.201.53.217 CHICAGO COOK IL
431985 = 71.201.68.61 CHICAGO COOK It 431986 = 71.228.2.201 SPRING VALLEY BUREAU IL 431987 = 71.228.2.27 LA SALLE LASALLE IL 431988 = 71.228.23.118 NAPERVILLE DUPAGE, WILL IL 431989 = 771.228.2345 NAPERVILLE DUPAGE, WILL IL 431990 77.229.73.180 BLOOMINGTON MCLEAN IL 431991 71.229.75.58 NORMAL MCLEAN IL 431992 = 71.239.129.20 WHEATON DUPAGE IL 431993 = 71.239.186.221 ZION LAKE IL 431994 71.239.187.67 GRAYSLAKE LAKE IL 431995 = 71.239.253.249 CHICAGO COOK IL 431996 = =71.239.27.180 CHICAGO COOK IL
431997
—71.239.43.67 NEW LENOX WILL IL
laa i
431999 71.239.55.92 HUNTLEY MCHENRY, KANE IL
432000 71.239.61.141 CHICAGO COOK IL 432700 939 90 4! GUR NE ™ me AKE a H 432002 71.57.3.17 NAPERVILLE DUPAGE, WILL IL 432003 71.57,33.24 NILES COOK IL 432004 71.57.44.80 FRANKLIN PARK COOK IL 432006 741.57.63.157 JOLIET WILL, KENDALL IL
432007
71.57.92.76 ROSELLE DUPAGE, COOK tL
Wie are | ha
DUPAGE IL
ASL
432009
76.16.1.11 DOWNERS GROVE
432012 76.16.189.233 EVERGREEN PARK COOK IL 432013 §76.76.213.19 CHICAGO COOK [L 432014 76.16.243.52 SCHAUMBURG DUPAGE IL 432015 76.16.255.164 CHICAGO COOK IL HIGHLIGHT = GEO-CODED RESULTS ONLY
ALL OTHERS FROM ACCOUNT RECORDS 3
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 106
_Gase 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 107 of 130 Page ID #:883
TICKET # IP ADDRESS CUSTOMER CITY
CUSTOMER COUNTY CUSTOMER STATE
432016 76.23.65.126 CHICAGO COOK IL 432017 76.23.68.15 WAUKEGAN LAKE It. 432018 76.23.78.180 PEORIA PEORIA IL 432019 76.29.26.158 MORTON GROVE COOK (L 432020 76.29.32.36 CHICAGO COOK IL 432021 76.29.35.172 ANTIOCH LAKE IL 432022 76.29.36.240 CHICAGO COOK IL 432023 76.29.4443 CHICAGO COOK IL 432024 76.29.53.56 PALATINE COOK IL 432026 76.29.79.47 CICERO COOK Tk 432027 76.29.97.30 POSEN COOK IL
432028 98.193.110.119 PLAINFIELD WILL, KENDALL Lo
432030 98.193.9.222 WAUKEGAN LAKE” IL
432031 98.206.106.234 OAK FOREST COOK IL 432032 98.206.11.227 GLENVIEW COOK IL 432033 98.206.118.16 MERRIONETTEPARK COOK IL 432035 98.206.227.66 MOKENA WILL . iL 432037 98.206.231.28 HINSDALE DUPAGE (L
432038 98.206.245.122 CHICAGO — COOK __‘}
432040 98.206.40.164 CHICAGO. COOK IL
432041 98.206.44.107 CHICAGO COOK IL 432042 98.206.48.247 MCHENRY MCHENRY IL 432043 98.206.98.9 WARRENVILLE DUPAGE IL 432044 = 98.212.11.69 ROCKFORD WINNEBAGO IL 432045 98.212.135.39 URBANA CHAMPAIGN IL 432047 938.212.155.105 CHAMPAIGN CHAMPAIGN IL
432048 98.212.190.193 DES PLAINES COOK IL
432049 98.212.196.209 CHAMPAIGN CHAMPAIGN IL 432050 98.212.197.162 CHAMPAIGN CHAMPAIGN IL 432051 98.212.220.251 KEWANEE HENRY IL 432052 98.212.227.110 ROCKFORD WINNEBAGO IL
BELVIDERE BOONE IL
432053 98.212.36.159
432085 98.212.62.146 ROCKFORD ~ WINNEBAGO IL
432057. 98.213.108.128 CHICAGO © ~ COOK IL
432058 98.213.127.203 ROCKFORD WINNEBAGO IL 432059 98.213.129.83 LOVES PARK WINNEBAGO, BOONE IL
432063 98.213.154.107 ROCKFORD WINNEBAGO IL
“COOK. L. WINNEBAGO,BOONE IL
~ 98.213.182.122 CHICAGO 98.213.192.42 LOVES PARK
432067 432069
432072 98.213.227.230 CHERRY VALLEY WINNEBAGO, BOONEIL
432074 98.213.38.72 CHICAGO COOK iL 432076 98.213.51.85 WILMETTE COOK IL 432077 98.213.88.34 GLENWOOD COOK IL 432078 98.213.93.81 GLENWOOD COOK IL 432079 98.214.161.8 PEORIA PEORIA IL 432080 98.214.170.43 DUNLAP | PEORIA IL 432083 98.215.116,187 BLOOMINGTON “MCLEAN IL 432084 98.215.210.179 SPRINGFIELD SANGAMON IL 432085 98.218.212.122 SPRINGFIELO SANGAMON IL HIGHLIGHT = GEO-CODED RESULTS ONLY
ALL OTHERS FROM ACCOUNT RECORDS 4
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 107
Case 2:12-cv-08333-ODW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page 108 of 130 Page ID a #:884
TICKET # IP ADDRESS CUSTOMER CITY CUSTOMER COUNTY CUSTOMER STATE
432086 98.215.224.142 CHICAGO COOK IL 432087 98.215.227.45 CHICAGO COOK IL 432088 98.215.249.197 SPRINGFIELD SANGAMON IL 432089 98.215.32.36 CHICAGO COOK IL 432090 98.215.35.193 CHICAGO COOK IL 432091 98.215.54.93 BLOOMINGTON MCLEAN IL
432002 98.215.77.122 CHICAGO
qT wit =
CHAMPAIGN ~ CHAMPAIGN IL
COOK iLL
| Fi AAr _ ABI My Wy LT
hl he i i ai
432006 98.222.132.14
432097 98.222.55.252 URBANA CHAMPAIGN IL 432098 98.222.65.129 QUINCY ADAMS IL 432099 98.222.74.155 BARRINGTON COOK IL 432100 98.222.75.251 LAKE ZURICH LAKE IL 432107 98.222.90.191 PEORIA PEORIA IL 432102 98.223.10.117 BEACH PARK LAKE iL 432103 98.223.168.201 CHICAGO LAKE IL 432104 98.223.212.218 GLENDALE HEIGHTS DUPAGE — IL 432106 98.223.8.13 BEACH PARK LAKE IL 432107 9$8.223.3.234 ZION LAKE IL 432108 98.223.89.194 BLOOMINGTON MCLEAN IL 432112 98.226.118.15 ROCKFORD WINNEBAGO IL 432122 98.226.17.78 ORLAND HILLS COOK IL 432123 98.226.271.151 ELK GROVE VILLAGE DUPAGE IL 432124 98.226.68.25 BERWYN COOK IL 432125 98.227.107.209 CHICAGO COOK IL 432126 98.227.107.24 CHICAGO COOK IL 432127 98.227.110.118 CHICAGO COOK IL 432128 98.227.134.132 KANKAKEE KANKAKEE IL 432129 = 98.227.137.60 CARPENTERSVILLE KANE IL
98.227.146.114 CARPENTERSVILLE KANE IL
432130
Mt
432132 98.227.220.235 GLENDALE HEIGHTS DUPAGE iL
432134 98.227.240.143 MATTESON OK IL.
432136 98.227.93.145 RICHTON PARK 60K
DUPAGE, WILL qL COOK iL
CO
098.228.138.109 NAPERVILLE 98.228.196.35 NILES
432138 432139
IGTON HEIGHTS A TON HEIGHTS
432141 98.228.231.69 OK, LAKE (L
ARLING
432142 98.228.239.222 ARLINGTON HTS CHAMPAIGN IL 432143 98.228.50.64 CHAMPAIGN CHAMPAIGN [L 432144 = 98.228.245.111 SCHAUMBURG DUPAGE IL 432145 = 98.228.72.139 CHICAGO COOK IL 432146 98.228.73.51 CHICAGO COOK [L 432147 98.253.133.48 BURBANK COOK IL 432149 98.253.178.180 WEST CHICAGO DUPAGE [L 432150 98.253.188.21 CHICAGO COOK IL 432151 = 98.253.233.38 WILMETTE COOK IL 432152 = 98.253.39.234 WHEELING COOK ik. HIGHLIGHT = GEQ-CODED RESULTS ONLY
ALL OTHERS FROM ACCOUNT RECORDS 5
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 108
Gmail - Urged &ClReGésDESG2rn@b Oini&st Becument pie : Files Qaeda dale Pag RalAPoobit3® ikagns 30c6&view...
1 of 4
- CMe i Morgan Pietz <morganpietz@gmail.com>
Urgent M&C Request on Guava v. Comcast - St. Clair County 12-MR-417
Morgan E. Pietz <mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com> Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:15 AM
To: Kevin Hoerner <kth@bphlaw.com>
Cc: "paduffy@wefightpiracy.com" <paduffy@wefightpiracy.com>, "johnisteele@gmail.com" <johnisteele@gmail.com>, "jlsteele@wefightpiracy.com" <jlsteele@wefightpiracy.com>, "Ibeasley@ilmoattorneys.com" <lbeasley@ilmoattorneys.com>, "Thomas V. Leverso" <tvieverso@gmail.com>, Erin Russell <erin@russellfirmchicago.com>, "John D. Seiver" <johnseiver@dwt.com>, "atoennies@lashlybaer.com" <atoennies@lashlybaer.com>, "holly@ghalaw.com" <holly@ghalaw.com>, "acallahan@sakawys.com" <acallahan@sakawys.com>
Thanks, Kevin. Just to be clear then, you signed the pleading, and you are now re-confirming that it was correct: the person who verified the petition in this action is named "Alan Mony."
We will proceed on that basis then.
If you change your story later, after refusing to meet and confer on this now, | am going to have to no choice but to seek attorneys' fees.
Best regards, Morgan
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Kevin Hoerner <kth@bphlaw.com> wrote:
The issues have already been briefed. See you in court.
Kevin T. Hoerner
Attorney at Law
Becker, Paulson, Hoerner & Thompson, P.C. 5111 West Main Street
Belleville, Illinois 62226
Phone: 618.235.0020
From: morganpietz@gmail.com [mailto:morganpietz@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Morgan E. Pietz Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 10:29 AM
To: paduffy@wefightpiracy.com; Kevin Hoerner; johnisteele@gmail.com; jlsteele@wefightpiracy.com Cc: lbeasley@ilmoattorneys.com; Thomas V. Leverso; Erin Russell; John D. Seiver; atoennies@lashlybaer.com; holly@ghalaw.com; acallahan@sakawys.com
Subject: Urgent M&C Request on Guava v. Comcast - St. Clair County 12-MR-417
2/15/13 11:36 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 109
Gmail - Urgent LCIReGsDESGrin@ bY Obni&st Document pce , File sOAlaQdcrle Cag ald Moohit3® ik-egps 3lOc6& view...
John, Paul, and Kevin,
In the interest of advancing the issues in this case, and ensuring that we don't have any more surprises at the hearing next week, I'd like to meet and confer with you on an important new issue in this case, stemming from your oppositions, on an expedited basis.
In Court yesterday, | asked Kevin if “Alan Moay” actually exists. That may seem like an unusual question to ask, but as you know, my experience with the mysterious “Alan Cooper” involved in your other lawsuits has conditioned me to be skeptical.
Kevin told me that someone did verify the petition in this case, but that there may have been some kind of typo on the name, but that he was not sure on the details.
Having now reviewed your opposition to Tom Leverso’s motion (p. 5), | see that the new story is that the verification Supposedly says “Alan Mony” not “Alan Moay.” The verification sure looks like “Alan Moay” to me. Since it appears there may be a factual dispute about that point, | would ask you to bring the original with you to Court next week.
More importantly, the name “Alan Mony’ rings a bell. | note that aman named “Allan Mooney” has previously been listed as the manager of MCGIP, LLC, one of Prenda’s earlier shell company plaintiffs. | further note that the address for MCGIP, LLC is “care of’ Alpha Law Group, the most recent affiliation for John’s former (current?) law partner Paul Hansemeier, who is also the brother of Prenda’s current preferred technical expert Pete Hansemeier. See the attached Minnesota Secretary of State business entity detail for MCGIP, LLC. Further, | note that a man with the name “Allen Mooney’ is apparently involved in the online adult entertainment business, per the attached Adult Industry News article where Allan Mooney was selling the domain name <orgasms.com>. Finally, | note that one “Alan Mooney” is also a current client of Alpha Law / Paul Hansemeier, in Mooney v. Priceline.Com Incorporated et al., No. 12-cv-02731-DWF-JSM (D. Minn. Oct. 26, 2012) (listing Paul Hansemeier of Alpha Law Firm LLC as attorney of record for plaintiff “Alan Mooney’). See the attached copy of the original Hennepin County complaint in that matter.
| further note that this is not the fist time there have been questions about Prenda submitting bogus verifications (see Alan Cooper). For that matter, it is not the first time a supposed Prenda “client” has supposedly had trouble spelling their own name correctly on the signature line of a document where they swore to tell the truth under penalty of perjury (see Daniel Web|b]er in the Sunl/ust case, where | understand that the sanctions motions for both the initial fraud on the Court, and the subsequent fraudulent declaration trying to explain the first fraud, are still pending).
| note that unlike the other oppositions | received, which were supposedly signed by Paul Duffy, that in the opposition to Mr. Leverso’s motion, which was the only one communicating the supposed new spelling for
2 of 4 2/15/13 11:36 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 110
Gmail - Urgen 6 LCIReGsDESGrin@ bY Obni&st Bocument pee : File sQAlaQdcrle Cag alduloohit3® ik-Begns 3Oc6& view...
your verifying client “Alan Mony”, Kevin Hoerner signed, rather than counsel from Chicago. Perhaps this is to maintain plausible deniability so that when it turns out the person's name is really “Allan Mooney” you can blame it on a miscommunication over the phone? All of this just seems like a ploy to try and explain away that there are too many letters for “Allan Mooney” to be mistaken for “Alan Moay.”
| would really like to believe that this case is not also a fraud, and that you are not attempting to cover up one lie with another (again). But like | said, experience has taught me to be skeptical where Prenda is concerned.
So, in light of all these facts, and in order to give you an opportunity, in good faith, to explain yourself prior to the hearing, | have two questions:
(1) What is the correct spelling of the name of the person who verified the petition, what is that person’s address, and are "Allen Mooney" of MCGIP fame, and "Alan Moay/Mony" the verifying "client" here, the same person?
(2) Since you repeatedly note in the oppositions that your verification is legitimate because it is notarized, what is the name, state, registration number, and business address for the notary who supposedly witnessed Mr. Al[l]Jan Moay/Mony/Mooney sign the verification?
Note that these good faith meet and confer questions are separate and apart from the issue of whether it is appropriate for Tom to use a Rule 237 and OSC procedure to compel you to produce the affiant and notary to testify at an evidentiary hearing. For sure, we will get to that at the hearing next week.
| would like to incorporate and address your response on these questions into a combined reply, as courtesy to the Court. In order to give the Judge time to read everything, | plan to file the reply on Friday. Accordingly, | must insist that you get back to me by tonight (2/14). If this case is not a fraud, then you should have no problem providing this information, since | assume it must be readily at hand. And then just bring the original verification with you next week.
Please feel free to give me a call if you'd like to discuss.
Best regards,
Morgan
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Morgan E. Pietz <mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com> wrote:
3 of 4 2/15/13 11:36 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 111
Gmail - Urged &ClReGsDESG2n@b Wini&st Becument pe : File sOAlaQdcrle Cag aliduoOhit3® ik-Begps 3Oc6& view...
4 of 4
Paul, As you know, since I served you with a copy, I filed a motion to quash in this case.
I have not seen any kind of a response to my motion, or to any of the other similar motions filed by the other attorneys representing other Does. Did you file a response? If you did, or if you are still planning on doing so, please make sure you serve me with a copy ASAP.
Best regards, Morgan
P.S. Note that I could not find an email address for Earl Hubbs, who I understand is also counsel for another objecting John Doe. If anyone else has it, please forward this correspondence to him.
Morgan E. Pietz
THE PIETZ LAW FIRM 3770 Highland Ave., Ste. 206 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com Ph: (310) 424-5557
Fx: (310) 546-5301 www.pietzlawfirm.com
Morgan E. Pietz
THE PIETZ LAW FIRM 3770 Highland Ave., Ste. 206 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com Ph: (310) 424-5557
Fx: (310) 546-5301 www.pietzlawfirm.com
Morgan E. Pietz
THE PIETZ LAW FIRM
3770 Highland Ave., Ste. 206 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 mpietz@pietzlawfirm.com Ph: (310) 424-5557
Fx: (310) 546-5301 www.pietzlawfirm.com
2/15/13 11:36 AM Supplemental Exhibits - Page 112
Feb 1515 Cag@2:12-cV:08338'ODW2JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/18°'Pagé 1E£8 of 130 Page ID #:889
ay Fea TE Tey MI
i Morea Ree i FAX: (910) 546-5301 ee ° PHONE: (310) 424-8057 i ene aw : FROM: Thomas Leverso ee ee a FAX: 630-627-1360 fo ee eee : _PHONE: 630-936-9902 ee ee = PAGES: télincluding this Cover 0 = z= Hike “Alan Mony’ 2 COONIA a DS fee a
COMMENTS: fi
Morgan:
Our investigation was able to turn up an “Allan Meny” in Indiana with two letter “L's”. His only alias/alternate
as
spelling is the name “Allen” with the letter “EK” and still =f
two letter “L's”.
r-1 fe
Regards,
ART BULA Sy
“il
TF.
: oe ra __
|_| CRGENT
PRIGASE COMMENT
I
PLEASE REVIEW .
|. FOR YOUR RECORDS Sipplementel aiean lage
red 15 19G§@12:12-c¥'08333-ODWIIC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/1%3Pagé-114 of 130 Pagé ID
Resulis for Alan Mony
#:890
wes reopie Sear Gri Find Anyone lnstantiy. Search Now!
People Sitar
Fas
‘ alan
ied
Rare tee Pharr
Leek cap
Lae fy cary
Rack powrid Check
Cranial Racers
Probe Recor
Sialie
Alt Stgeas
Pape | of
Meriar og
Pas) Aaye
k : i ope el r a
- al
SCA Paves Ajay Wats. Akan vigny, Ay fant
abd a
weekng fay A Moony? ith USA Peopie Seenst, you car find and eos qect wilt) farney cat fronts palates pst bout anvane! Ve vocated A Mony 1 Poriend. OF Eimory choose a record lo gt: current address shone number pis mon debailed sackgroune infomation! Reports ere wrstantl
POUT? 33 reduces for A Many
For better results, please add a state
=
Pret Foes
NOM YAN TITHE
ABS thd need: RMT RS MY
MONY, ANIKA A
PSStoitee heres MEYERS AKA ANNE
MOONY ADITY A
WON. ANTHONY W
MONTY ALLAN E
AAS et nea e: AA Ey, BAC
MONTE ASKS
ALEOCIEE FEN PA! Mu AS AA PRBAME DARA A WAY
MONY, AIMAN JUDGE
Ago pe are ay AMA S
2 MLAB, Al GREY OAC ARIAS SS
A aay at
WEIS TAPS Aiaany ©. CAG AMEN S
MONT. ANGELA
MON, ANITHE
MONT ANNE MARILIG
MONT. ASONA
MON, ANITHA
MONT ANSY
mE
wT
a
af
ri a1
o4
6a
49
La
ti
AoCross Cily Sire
PGT ANT oh SEATTLE, Wit
PLAINWELE, Ml Sal ESBURG. Mi ri ZO tT
TRENTON, NJ
mat S CHURCH Wa PLUMNSHOHS, WN. DEVON, PA PAINCETON G7, Ra NEW PROVIDENCE, Ne OREN. iT BRIDGSPORT, CT QRLGHOMAN CTY HOUSTON, x
CK
PoAGNMYELL, Ai KALAMA E: C4) SSEURG, MM HAO NY
iAINESVILLE, FL CILBARUYATER FL
ASAFiL, ih
TUCSON, AS
SAM POM, fal MAINS ON HERSHTS, i: WES TLAND A
SUAUOUE 14 VAPERVILLE It ARCA STREAM iL ROR LING MEADS.
BAINESVILLE, FL OLEARWATER. TL
PORTLAND, OF SEATTOR, Fur
LORE SEACH, CA SIGNAL Hick. the
MIAN, CIE
HOMCLULL Hi SANTA MARL, TA
Possinic Motel «on
VEN ARH ipo 3)
inch, z ‘hd didlo 2
MONTY LOUIS NCERES jue 70) FS im c as +
ta ey, NEER LA A
MON, ANGELS MON, ERECER CK
HARI Gali sf tige E+
AE A Fea ee
MOA PRE DER
MOY HERARO
tS Bg} i vr eT
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 114
if
-“,
rel 18 13 a§er2:12-c¥e8333-GDWIC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/133Pagé-L48 of 130 Payé ID Results for Alan Mony #:891 Page 2 of 2
'& MOY, ABERGE. REVI TORE, NY 7 TROL ner | oMONY, ALY LOOMS BEACH, 0A wf rae rne
sa MOONY, ABRAHAM PALE THOSPE, Ho nd kok Hane Fy
a, MONT ADY WROTE alici, SEAN ae wide ce
rd MONY, ANTHONY #LEZAR RIA, VA my Peel See PY mall, MON Y AMDRE BERS SAL FL we ye Las 2 22 4MONY.ABOCE BRABEN RIVES, 1 4 Peay
Fie MOY, ABC YD APACHE JUNC’ SM, AY Slade Ath bias tele
fz MON, ARTS. J 7S CALLA, EX
Astotisled marr. J LAR A
"2, MONT ANITHA as, HEPC] Fal
Ae MONY. SNITHE *| SEAT Th Vi 37 MON. AMANDA WEST SLOOMHIELD, MI
22. MONY, ANTHONY POAIMWELS . SI ;
“4. MOONY ANTHONY OLAINWEL, Mi ee ao MOONY, ANTHONY ail PLANAMEL! Al Py cen
ai MOY, ALEX “hy BUDE PEt Pa deta a3 Lhe dads
ny be
2t, «MOONY ALEX BHILADELPELA, PA saAbacusee
7% MONY ANN LAS VEGAS, NV v eee
First teat, asi Lirky Sette: zips. Age MG P Nicay Aj) Giotves w: bas ila i
Home | Aboutlie Aa Products | Peugie Pirecloyy Acuties | sale | Bovecy | Terme’ Congitans | Comaciis Link Tots fookmare Us E2012 LSA Peone Sean
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 115
Feb 15 154 a$6D:12-c¥08383-GDWIC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13s3Page-140f 130 Page ID Results for Alan Mony Phoemx Az #892 Pave | of J
on. re eer ee ease — = a, a7 ® "hes ee 4 Ty aS | ee | eS sa a ee ae aft = iy # Adak tht (ieee rT Rit me aes PoE tad ey : ;
7 ie Sy ae Be ae td eal ote oe oo a ee ook Sebgiitam: ey om we ia sg Sn ee ny et ay Ee op oa ke Me ee pean | et lee = sani ge Li an —, an) i » a ‘cL hi oh ee
asic Soa) Ma aft ts A ee Laie Sei a Pee Boe | ay 1 per ete iy on
Awe Mit toast coily Sa aa Agi Avan nec pho FZ6TA » fhrakebel Sarwar ngires Ahir ory, abe ory, = Men: Legion for A Monw? Wek OSA Feome Searen, wou tan find ant reogmicc! veth fardy, of Ierios, nelebves jost atouhemyore! Ye ocetes Atfony i Tucsa AS Boy GOOG 6 TACIT hi Gh Guitent atidrtss, Chote rinmaer pis moe Oeldded haskgraucd infermatan! Reports ara pecan Found 2 results for A Mony Az
mS Be = ‘ = , - : kot te agli ped | PEshE j Se dy eee TEs re
: Rot ASA. SE AZ wit : CANTON A oe Arsocinined mares VASES HESSHTS, 1 Man ASH, WES FLAN Mil PAaMES ARAN, MONY
x MOY ABCYD AP Ae SHE ae ont oh Ae Pe ee ee
ay -_
meme «Ages | Ae Procuets | Sects Disco - Arties Mey: Emvacy | Term aédiondtens Cenacilts | Linkin is . Booka Js GETS LS Mess Soamh
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 116
reb 15 13Case2:12-c¥+083G3-ODWeJC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13;3Rage-14:% of 130 Page ID Results for Alan Mony Belleville fi #.893 Page | of 3
meet sg 0 me o Ties i a 4 ety Fi = "i : Pach apd Lae =, a i . iY Soe Bes “ * ates each fen fie Ma at r i = 49 Bane gt Jag eee mE 8 - i a ; ts i BA Sn: Hg he eae Fe fee) Seppet ys Had tery PT ae, Dg = ate Tere SS et iS oma Soe ko maacraie Gers “aay Peace Sis = eee
fF tar vi Lett Ci. Spal Zip Ane Ann, Mony bedevillc Wbersis si isda,
Seria? games, fle Mbay Alen buh felon Lackey fas A ieny? With LSA Peogke Seerch you can find and neocon nest wih farmy, oud trands, mletives just alot anyone! Wwe located A Moay m Dy Giqun (A omy choose 0 feer kh io get corel edetess Phoce nut clos aire deities tachpmousd inlormeign! Repos are metact
Founs 2 results for A Mony 51.
™, =f
of ee i ee ee | ee aa a oe Bier te
1 MONY AIMAN UUOGE GUBGUE, 1A <i BAY JARAMING serie Scene NAPERVILLE dL oz Aseot hed names: Crimi STREAR |L AIMAN AL QUACT SLING VEADOWS IL DAY AMAN & IY AIAG S QAly AIMEM S Aboeny A MOLT ATA A ty 2
2 MANY, ACHARYA GLENVIEW, TL ? Bryer ee rey
gv AbOul ie Ad Procuets fpogte Daymay Autcies Help| Greacy : Tens 2 Conghers . Gonpetie Lota Toles + Beker Js hlO" S USA Saoa Search
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 117
rem 15 154 ag6p:12-cv083e3
Resulis for Alan Mony Chicago {I
Lael Cal bees : Le a ad. 8 Beas Bis «2 TO Se Potten Rit Spe phe LaScr pe SK Frat Khice Lent. Euan Mary
Lonkiig for A Afony? Wah LISA People Search, ycucan find and naotr tent wih tarey ond Weeds, aiatives ust about anyone! We located A Mony a Ear cheese aseccidss get cuventadsess phon number Slue wc pe decgiled backqm unt information! Reowts. are rstant!
Pounce 2 pesults for A Mony ll
Spe dpe es oe
\. MOMMY, FIMAM JUDGE an
Sao iated emer ANAM AL OUAnY Ay ikiAaan S Gary Alwan S O4DY, AGEL Fy ALY A
MASS TAA AV AN S
2 faONYLACHA
AYA
Ehime pout Us
C See a
ae fp EES oe
ALL Prd gts Pooch Presi ay Afboies Hipgs
08333-ODWIIC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/1353Pagé-1418)0f 130 Page ID
#:894 Pave | of |
a7 “ek
B HP eaen edo yy, Seance? Aw Wetiber Loan
:
roid ses her geal Perea. Foti Rood
Cty rae Zip Pate tHcage ara = Engen
Seb pares: lis i Mory, Aleut ‘dor, ALM gen
ee Ta maitre
G0rgat, SS Bias rerio saab Bewley:
ee eee E. Lf i
NAPERY LLE, IL CARGL STREAM, I ACh MEADS BL
ah LS pee ee she i“
= Td =e mm EAVISW, 3 jot! Sete
Privacy | Terms & Conctore | Conasiws ie Tels Booknakos 20093 184 Sipe Seairh
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 118
> 156 asé2:12-cv'08383-ODW2IC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/1353Pagé-149 of 130 Pagé ID Results fer Alan Mony Minneapolis Mn #:895 Paue | of 2
Des CES oa Pedy) a ee mr fe td Re Oe 2 a ee ae * Le HS e,4 K nik Caer Sa rat 8 Fev hry? goed z : L ea “ ee es | _ em Peorpay Papierde Nears pe Beare se ae oriny, Mernber. ces Suge Eraccdn Reyarse racy? Loceiii & chores Othe Gries! Say Pusit Sse Fre a ed eer Lofts Slate bd roe Jizn Morn Frere pc ts Less ™ be
Sarkar rae. Alon wives, ‘Allan Mates ni Misti
Lodieng for A Mony? War U4 Peacte Search, you can Pind and teqacnest vath family, od fends folatrees dust about anyone ye oeateo f\ Mony im Perdans, OR Sampty Soo 3 heron bo on CUE aoe, pre ouAbeY plus more coheed bac kgrapna ntoomatien Mestre are wrstamt
Found 30 resuts for A Mony:
marr cue tet [fee Sitlic, &, cee Sare, Pan! Papersitrte peetstes
$i fs - ve
; MONY, AN TITHE 4100 PORTLAND. OF - OY AMINE Goa 991 ee — SEATTLE. WA MONY, teRARD Ss alee fumsiec lated "a hee as 8 LeU ONCE RES fae ita of “Be Vow? Se all rates
2 WEIR. ANIA 5 of PACES Al a MEYERS MATTHEW! EE fag Sa) he i ipa Tate ae hE . SALESBURG, by MOAY, ANTHONY WALL IAM OMABLES (cae 327 cane wi ASDC ata fares bo Aa ME ROA ASST MAS ADEE tape Aas (42° RS ANTS AN ME . . a a
3 Moan, AGITVA ag TRENTOS, NJ _F Ba TUT JA f eed FALLS CHURCH va tee dak rsietane eta EVOL PA PRICE GN WOT, Me MEY PRAIVIRE MESS NJ ChE UT BRIGGEPGRT, €T CRLASHOMA DOTY, fi HOUSTGM Tx
4 MOSY, ANTHONY W a5 PUN YELL My el ole PTT ay =H KALAMAZOO A ed attests GALESSURG ht GRONK. N¥
Br ow
2. MONY, Ad F GAINESVILLE, PL ROY ANGELA canara!
CLEARWATER fi. LCHY =HEDSRICE
i MONT. ALLAN B 55 PRAZL, th
HASTY, SAN ot (age Sa) Fi fered Gres Pete
‘ Pencirieed menie ce ALLEN, BAGMTY.
=
MON, AGIA an Fsce Ee. ee af ebaandcglendd? Sanociefed nameén. WACESON PENS! PS) Mal
MANT, AS WES TLANL MM
PARAMES ARAN: MONT
“at
é. MONT, AUAN JUDGE at SRE, é 2 a “EP SSVILLE oH
Avterocisted manners DARL SSSA,
ORY ACMAN S Bo IN AERA Ki
AJRUAN AL Dh?
OACY. AIMANS
Jey A MUS TAPS. AMMAN S SMOY. AIMSLES
Udesteb ated?
3 MONY, ANGELA GAINESVILLE, ONY. Ae FE cane, getter ee CLEARWATER. F MON, ESE DERICK Sala iia
HON, ALEXANDER B 2 LONG SEACH CA are Teper We : SIGNAL BELL A ee ineiaet
o ONY ANNE MARILIA SEATTLE, WA saben otisteligeeies
- Many. ASOMA 34 NAAR! OK, pide bite at dun
; # = ‘o = ~ js a E a E tl Ife
RIN" HONOLUA, H erat SANTAUARIA CA saber
14 MORY, ANSY vis seh ble Sect 8 MORY, ABERGEL hEW YORK, NY e sidearitcea MON. ALY LONS BEACH GA a sohenat Se gimiatet s
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 119
RES!
1S
14
hN
hi
wt
7+
Hts for Alan Mony Minneapo!
BONY ANTHONY
MOONY, ANDRE
MONY, ABGITE
MONY, ABCYO
MAGN, ARTIS J A Ase. mite Cattige:
4 fA Bs
MOONY, ANITHA an LRONY ATG MEA,
MORY, ANTHORY
MOONY, ANTSORY ay MOMMY RULES
hONY. ALES a
a
tae Last
Morty
a te
uttss — Atl Products
Pes one aby:
Case 2 12-cv0883RO0DWsIC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 is \4n
#:896
MAL ETHORPE VR WORCESTER. hats ALEXANDINIA | Vik MALE, FE
ERADSN RIVER, EL APACHE JUNCTION, AZ
CALLA, “K :
a Ae
WEST SLO wed. MMi PLAIRAYO LL A - RLAIVEL 4 TH AGEL SALE PA
“HILADS LPH A Las YOGeS NY imaty SHG
mined podes
v
hela Govecy Terms 2 fetdtions S77 LIGA Peto Seamer
s Aire ons :
Veiresota
Rage 120. of 130 Page 0
rake 2 OF
ts.
cA aaeteet a! : tational by atin! ts 3 eee _ ee Sheba pectien bisects Ae theta Mery Shagetedon te
f ‘agate ae
Reg dy ett” fem Yh pte | ‘ Sen theee ant 4 ie. a 4 of pete tan 4 as ee hae in
Lim ce
(arena EY
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 120
"2 15 TES6°2:12-cv808833-ODW2IC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13;sPage/122ief 130 Page,ID People Search from Intelius searches billions of pubiP records instantly. Search free now! Page 1 of 3
ieee
»
bai oh * 'e ae pS
a
INTELIUS ee :
LG 2 oS erates -
' = ie i ea ee a” 74 Bl we eg — = ‘ ibe 4. Wie Jar = + “ a a, ae a Loe ne an Baek ore tat Shock A THT eee oe ioe Rent he: Lehn Tale STANT | Shope cree loo
ae hy a Sos teen Fecpie Cesta Sats
5,
Search results for Sian Mony in Chicacs, I.
:
tia y CANT Se by merits (rib AW fA | See saps OF | Prewisiss ah aul Saree + Petey ‘ lie — = —— : = — Sree Cee
Vee found 16 peeple thal match your sen" ch.
, i . ay - _ Fa i ame] rs + a =m 5 = ier" 4 i bey ae ct am ay > Staal. eer ts Ae Wye A Moony , agi 6. Bee Ra heb 7 dal {pli Lim: So eh Se rc ae i =i | eee r| & eH | 3 - a4 dicey fa saa | = aT) A Wilpar KPigery ohigage IL. Ar ates WLersal SSR ty be tery wtaeg "ae Tee WH Bay Rip ancial |sc 72 VY tny hiew Youth ta iitreiy Gib ear in?! ae) b rrsggtt SS PEVELES a Coober 3) Cor ant a, ee A (ee) Md Vanape near Raho oF acc erune fe hel Prt | a Ze m: ‘i Searcy hienoy goe-86 a Te Eo =~ « - A = ~ 1 i te ry i iy een Sagal ere ee [eatery e be fies ‘¥ = ty i Sance ony (hetasror | Joe heoeatsiun ald LONaS se heh Stay Chet, cae ol SSP" ETL © ore ih Biles! rw Meal ce Mc ae Mersts gir, TE gt a | ity tAvete al a. Fe tha at Peds at i ae | RT tet Mee is AL Caurty Meigs | Lr aed: anid aovoles (iki Safoy jen anes Menten ern Eee be Se Gs! GF RE hati ge esr cerrs: P 4, ne # et =f le we eat Jo Ping Moryv age<i4 Sat purges bee i Ay 7 tee ean =] ve ai 7 het hendtiners ee vie Hum Vili Top deta yO =F eT , Hang FR Weel ita 1. Ae as ‘hioeties Tir ors HESEGE “NS nike (ltt Barat SO Mee Fahwact Aleraet(s ine Litnversity Varies aig mate fe Pye . Panes t ,SHgrees trae Ubiweraiy Hast pitt: Winnie tytdue Unvetaiy at Cones, Huy EEN rib afebals Kirti Tiley ie eB Pres Seeesag ee Tia LF ane - oid - s Let SS 4. ai : oe ATbine Eizepeth Vony , age : Ot kaa meer la mint atleast o ey Warhrag ial thy ee ae ainfi ei Ss aaere ad reed
Kristina Eiesieth
EPIV
is. fee a poche aa FT |
cmaeeiens> Mi
Cae Fe 1h og ee ee coed Meera Ly oe a = ae a . cat ae dare el _ ? et : ke a PMs oe ae | Ete ee ed ae
Sth Asser ieee
ASAE ee
arika Wnty
MASS ah a!
el ree ee +e F Facet SORE Ster{ =f a nee — aa
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 121
Feb 16 is , ) : : &° '9 Ease'2212-cv-08363/0DWHIE Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page,422 of 130 Page ID
People Search from Intelius searches billions of aubien records instant
abe. (AddeSe 2
in Lacy
ea “TT i m yp om, r] tad Res Wino Mi Ten y Biyoh 5348 it. ” a # Prantaiatina tery Mra aie + ages % a, Pelee) =) ae =r = t "a q Wihlys Anish hoo tt, int sophan 7 Mony 41 La, x 4 Ve} M1 HA et eee & STSeayT Way | ie ir « = per 2 = bi i Ta Ai ei
Manges Many ; Se eae
fom = — Poel ee
898
en i F a Phe Fees ar eres oe at
Soa ue IL EOS
pal se i ye Ws
a mss 4 i eo Te
ars t . a = - = unaisey ony er ihre “ Shad Hees ay ‘235 + itor pia saree At alles sted lh. ‘Veta Persian JAs. Vecas: hy a La ee Vinod Mi Mey , age $8 ~ Poe i i ‘io eS BJ * = r ea = Hog atlet ct bad Saeed Wreislitors tt SSE: Pridigy “4 eSrerte ty i wi Gren sh 2 ep BUA Sea Mremalsina Mony . ade So ie #4 1 i] & a 2 demas ato squid eee oll Boenibarg ih Pema ian “Ganse + Sew hte | rea | ae oe oe, A “pi Vidya Fis Wearny , age si - = htt gt ‘ les ae i t a oe oe 40 atm eh <p Hab ay rd, et Prey Mi ar are bey EE = a . Sie wae dies a | Phe Pty male ax = _ ! = ¢ gti, re { j= i ES af Pom - 8 Li pe Cricaye | Cal reticle ll UE Ke ey 1. oat =} Fr Tease, ory 5 iT * = a Sea rT ard i iyFu i 4. ave = I f ta eal He hue = ; ; r iangesh Wony ' Pee Safe a Py? ep Hiem. [Beah ota or= aa; Meds STE
p70 ly. Search freenow! Page 2 of 3
- ae F 4 rei chia tater bk Fe *U 41s Peo ree | “7 q a) ETS “ater. ban Line ~ r = - Ca bo (a) a
See hay :
ek SAE te | Sees = ae Bo = " wil =; rat ee Pater be Se ile late ealed ee ta & ed " ul wv Se fone co a. a! = ol deat WE RS Fa —- 4 Ay , wee uit is ed F te EIS Wi —— —— oS a reat 7 Pp ii! Pit rita | rere wap * Kisraypitcs biony : = r stig Woe y thal i AAO = aa FS ee & Lath r nia Per aEs “2 59-5 Pies fs
= = = Sires te At Fe se seal rk al = -
a = hat ne | * “at
~ a =
—_— = mh 2 noe at ra ote 5:
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 122
"© 1S (€asé12-cv0833G20BWIC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 ,Rage23,of 130 Page JD . ss P eae ‘ 7. & ; . iN People Search from Intelius searches billions of pubti@ 9 cords instantly. Search tree now!
x sc i 4
ak a3 f
art ee ce ea | male eee
Proimaintha Meny
Junge Annan ene
Aun Rory
MAteyy Sas
Resles “copin Searches
= pat ‘0 re
ee ee 2s afi Tor,
ra
wa : ' 2 - > Barbara jitayv
breech = Fe bed it = [ek ‘Atl ae ot i Y FACHISIE |. - Sremalainva Woany f = i ms ey Hh ar AF f avira: | er, | HSS Alan Niony at i s Ls i thy ap) re wheal 3 ero! Slrerr ‘iL tet Ka Y burn Biony yea dai
‘jot the ngnt person? Search again
First Nae
Alan
i ey! — sf } i
rag | rr | =a) 4, aes rr
wh aie ae ] ri aa. Sb
= * | ties b A | = com = | *
ak * "
hit Last Narre vOc
Mari
I abPetyy
a ie
a
+ ~. = >
5 ae JL, f ® ; ae
Chicaga. iL
re A od oa oft) Ponte eto |p = ae iad = ® few Ce ect / 1m . Coe yy eae Mt ay i om 1° a Tak ey er, en] Poet Les Barbee
i: WE t= ° i afte Set aan tet Bhs) ee TH oe LE 4 Me Snel Fear
“Tey Ae
FH, a= = i i Ep yit. awl uN
fans Sunt
= F OP al dl ae ee |
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 123
Page 3 ofS
Feb 15 1Ca@se/2:12-c\08833-ORWedC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13, ede, People Search trom Intelrus searches billions of pub! 2 Herat instantly. Search free now!
QINTEwUS & ©
Odres
Pmoots Beeatety teste ete + Lyset Pansy th -Es7, Shp Tha Westie tee Ams Frese eae ae ound Asha Morny 5 Hee PLose5 Rein hes WoTkeg a raed Vote ASH Steers aoe “2h SRewtisS Pacaes Gan Gers e-
kag comet
itis CoPOs Wight seme or allo? the follwing 4 wt » eS Le ow i ae veer ° Hen ive es | TE i ie 4 os > Mos - ety - Seri Mefccke tom fy ile bnserhs Secon pear PAE ee OR =a 34 p< GEES ier: pri @ Gearon Pe Arar a ret J Pat : a \P ka iar *. - = a i wo a at er ine ron parson’ Search acain wet Name ia ost Nemec ne
ian tw oo
Search results for Alen Mor
- rae . 7 % a A i hu i este Thera Meo tyes oe Pestig i
Aan Viony
294,pf 130 Page JD Page | i of 2 ae
, aarp iin rr fw ES ax - = Ashe Moony fucsen, AZ Naa wer GL: Ee Hy es 7 7 caer s ky oh to |
am [wh = rhs weet
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 124
“eb 15 130 a§62:12-c¥+08333-QDW-JC Document = 1 Filed 02/20/13 fh O98: 125 of 130 Page ID
—_ 7 45) 1. kot oh; Te
#:901 People Search from Intelius searches billiens of pubhe records instantly. Sea rch free nw’ Page 2 oF 2
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 125
“8b 12 1€ase°:12-cv0883RODWsIC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13;6Rage1260f 130 Page;lD People Search from Intelius searches billions of puffi?écords instantly. Search free now! — Pawe | of 3
ng” = sit ha Ae Peantienntn ~~ IATELIUS : =
Lang @2 fer Roe * ie ie:
H Frome Segre FlAtrqionhe Sieh ° ie mips) seco Revere Uaeqan eto Prete: Mommy frotecaeiy | Sapipite Saree ste
FesceSie tt Ematlosweuc foster MeN Sonn Froadcp reonris FQehieur Pesrid Beery oss
fintion: (fSaT PES Sy Puthe itied Al aT fee Allaies | “wile Cpe Ali Gimes pi Faster = — - a . o + ee eee ee Wie found 16 pecp'e tat mately you! search i — = Ligh ir FF i 7 | ee; — L 4 Dm peehtrss CS Wabs¥ TS IwiSrey q0e iso aa == =e — a ai, YF bi a ae eas Weciy =") aac es wey kay Gal mare ayraiwis Ad Eero rleng a en T Mr E ‘ Vijay Bh Miony cet ceo, AL Aoveed Wi) Mratanar tc ey Wrens dey Te TAL Atv Finsrtia tye Lams fteny “ve “Gal, MY aOgth OM AD Figercare! — [the Perper eat Pe a= es bt] a Gans Sartial Czarhsr iM Wao es Enema. Cn cal tet itt pete = rT : [ae Be fey Eres is eo. Aon, Seren Mory . age O65 pee TOE Tete = 4 =the y ae t j hay me F . ce jill f Bi d ~ 1 = ! ti aE marl + ae ST of t out LE 5.7 Lig le Soreu Moy Bemeen 1. tt Paes) Sra Le Lis Sits Schost at oo EY SS AY yeh Awirega, OL Sopra” icra Bee tice wt La Matera withss Mt LM Tatty Mestiead = rversiyo” Wwe | weit Serie, rogpremite Th SH Pay Mace Tet Cielaigd SM ois Leora Seay ts > FETE, Cie an Met Sith Se7eel sea tamar Actaris Se mi = i 7 : ; r= T= 2 F 7 tae Ps he wtirw mi eee ei ee Hing MANY age 44 mer ee Fis a 4, a A illic ari - ‘at Ca 9 aes * ) — Ey tr oH a? Sa ae Wel 4 te i $ ard Men fe at t c rei en ‘i Wal eH: = weet (sue Pat eT UL. sRezica Fj 5 racer Mety ont ky Yerrullie | So wears ets ine | SSATP PRM ray sis a a Seas = a wie Laon NNery ‘apetle. Y Cores nate whivetety Fetes hla UV era aL, ag es Ne ae aT rey ei G
pate A istenspeys Kinrije han Fey Try
ae | © = . Pe Ce ng ee ee are — re (Sed errand conte ch, ‘ . ut is, jap’ = Ebr Lh a f Mori ‘ ae i = ae Sy ri 7 7 2 = “e al = et i. = =- é 4 sh rm oa sl r E ee oe ae spt 2 iS “= _ UT Fie» ey - a ah ha AY 25 °m pho) vo Peck k bo F i a EE i* ae Le at ' = yf eee aw ahr en Le (St teope, Ee hp Ey aa ea Pa fie Kristine Ebtobeth Sov igievs Th isthr wits gj Caben fai Stale. AS rvetai fon Ke BASIN <r j = nf ' iP Sets Bd pe yo agin eal ts [=v Lr Sacrwe MaH= Serr, ~ ai pe a de = =e ony a me es LAA se) Rees Lhe Ke guie0O Taverns Kalaesvers Ay! spear a) Resse? Wane SeleSE ure, ha Py wera re aed tte a4 af Eh 4 = > Es | poy ba c= eWn| <Aake ry = = 7 *
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 126
Feb 15 Cas@@512-cv-9833320RW-IC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 se A98, 427 of 130 Page ID
Deopte Search from Intelius searches billions of public records instantly.
4360 mah free naw?!
p15 Page 2 sa of 3 oP
#:903
iil ad Se aces na SHAN pe aes es WY Pets OF bic att Pesatiee coh ae 7fane pease . ‘ * = JE ire (Sry ihe ac |i ALP Seats. WAN, mii zt my f. 3 * “ » Te r G, moa a ae re LS i y May alae Te 24 fates Pe nA ty =. ait a as at eae = i a ae oP cee” ee ee a Hlay 3 Saal uf So Lay " a ae = gl 9 =, 7 ler Et L . WT wilh s iy The k & mia 14 ie dn vat
Stage, tL Pogherpp ies ne eer eve ore
Lae Vases, WY
“Vines MMony , age 36 Sut on so pte
yea ely te See Wie TF Fee Vd Sw egd | (o> MEA ay = al jp bt Sh t ‘ ‘ a E age
jinod MM Maimy “erm trineh HL
Ay
SE°Suroer ee 7d =< S| Sai bet era if bal
a, af bra
SPHTS FAP ae F getigy Te Si Pars bps rt ec
ee: = afr] | —sifela, fA FE Ue cg, © ae be
Seber die ok
oat ie ee Ld Jaa Lathes lager? Tr
Promataina Mony
1 Pdimues peat et ng fa een To ye: Sgr
‘oe =
Bis eer eae? Vidve Anish Meany .agé
we = ; oY ee Laika tate Se
wp ster eri “/ Jita Wipts Wage? one
Visa Weis: Sony Lord 1 Tin
Pre Sita, be
ae sein & Soeboprtites 7 plead Ea on Bette
ra i mn Cy} i ti a (> 5 ti} ia th aft. rat
a ell ot) meres
oh fie bie ie a ey ‘hed
Sonhain 7 haory ales
Saat Al
aca Hee:
on ere ete 1g
‘ = beste Ty D i a7 ti - i ; 4 ‘ | ei Se " I Fe ee z x
gee 2 a . mh ae he ba Tt te piae Bh ace
Bs 7”
?= E 1 “YE = l
are . = ' f= = t Adi ‘sak eee 3 Hl drm TFT fi Bees ts fe 8, oo Mangesh Many eae iat Saxe
rns wr if - aT | - - rT Ay ee a a i * ‘ ‘. mL: os ry ‘. rk r = z ee ho ee tl es 7 9 yee is reed Cy ed Peg hae At Laas bis Few we |
Manges: Weny ifarmest Botar il
isu t=
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 127
"ed 15 Galse! 921 2-cv-08383850DW-JIE Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 Page, 128.0 People Search from Intelius searches billions of oubliete records insiantiy.
of 130 Page ID P 1h
Searcy free ed Vage 3 o1 >
ope Derbate “otiv
i = = . * V Timest Jig tice tA He jaca forded ¢ Cie es te oils: Barbar. Peony Medora. # TA. Petia. daa 7 J: Premalaha a MIGnY MIG a Oe We we F ‘the b ban elirdp = = 1 cee Mg i i= r= Kerce = eat ae oat ey | 4 = rin ae ay be jit Proemeiathay t 1 “EF “arated i . or il, fle aa oe 2 aie is, We wit. dude Arman Maony Sere take ae a. ‘ r * } Sahar bite fe ay von i US r +S ioe " AUG Cupra Morr aes: es eT, 3 Tt <i | +8. | ee eth, mY i Mies wt Chie ie es alt r a, he futgba ps sf a | Fly = m, i ite afi il Fld hhh oy * Sunn FAO ifoudi 22 Eye ety Sarin Pegemert 1. ACME Nhe She sy Jernat Tec Re'ind toga Scarce . ri. by irs pre gd At ie Ply i 4 aoe Date Mert LL , om es, ~~ = é ae Not ine ight parson? Search again A . Fe , PSS Nee Aa Last Marre t oa ! Site Ala’ viony Belleville. IL eee " ket | os Salary see) FES Welty tm } = Are rll Ail ‘J ca hy Z ' brits: =o ’ mak Ms {= i a i =f “ Mi - ! ts ; PRS6 SC org Sars awa Ae
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 128
"eb 15 1 €ase:12-cvs0883RORWs3IC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13 cRage7129,0f 130 Page,|D People Search trom Intelius searches billions of pabhe?
records instantly. Search free now! Page | of ?
Live 2 ie are -
" oe ns Picts Senet "ey eerie : ;
ties Pe series devi Propoets erminiivas Again Peapie Sagas ae Sous VotemSeath 6 Ppapety Saree ett Pee Seay Re:
Search results for Sian Mony in United Stetes
We found Ayrin Lamony’
Address History Ayiin Lameony rot rm Potismetith, Vea
tts eu frean on Beet ka
‘= ad or Seb 4 ainda i = _ cM oyatrre Petal War Preark: Recgris wi | Fag a a 4, = is — -_ ‘ = _ -_ we = = AGE te Lae fe een eee irs » Soins Ren ates Seige | - AOMEs * SS Tfae Ae eS) , artis aE att fhchermouts ; » POSS. Seto’ = comcagt Merits +. Lbee ~ aes P| =P reaevey hd ret, ~ vt eabeE wit es - LEY Bris iia ee he ea ® Vattsos 6 beers = || ire cabs Pe, =i re rt a yh oaw@ity hes re 4 Seated 200k Sarre hes lone ' pa ee a peat g AES HE A] ay Nr) i fa Fel oy rad a 7 a =. mole Mant person’ Searer acain ae) Mame hel, Last Mans resus way 2? Stale Alan
Many Urited Srates 23
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 129
“eb 15 13 Caséo2:12-cws08B333-@DW-JC Document 53-1 Filed 02/20/13,
Peon
. =n, .
a sees 906 , ¢ Search from Intelius searches billions of publi records imstantly, §
sa apts a | j Leet ey F = | _ — é Sat Te ie tard a a ey = eT = i Basi
ahe0?.deal of 130 Page.|D
earch free now! Page 2 of 2
Supplemental Exhibits - Page 130