Oh my… Brett Gibbs continues to dig the hole he has willingly put himself in. Yet another reply to Morgan Pietz’s no-nonsense document was filed, and this filing was obviously crying for having a “Shrill voice” checkbox on the ECF submit page.

Full of ad hominem attacks and delusions, this is another attempt to assume an ostrich position after the blatant forum shopping has been made obvious and a suspicion of impudent, potentially criminal, Prenda’s fraud has surfaced.

The filing in question was a reply to Morgan Pietz’s “Supplement to Notice of related cases,” that was covered during the last week by:

So what are Brett’s “arguments” this time? In the past, sometimes Brett Gibbs provided contestable, yet coherent thoughts, so he could be considered a somewhat serious adversary. This time I have a sheer disappointment and a bad aftertaste, even with the realization that Gibbs essentially works on our side by letting emotions reign in a court document.

Morgan Pietz exceeded the mandated length of his notices. This is the only cohesive argument in this opposition.

This is the only cohesive argument in this opposition. The cases are not related because… courts found joinder improper. If you don’t believe me, read this argument (the entire tantrum document is embedded below): you won’t believe your eyes either. Certainly, Gibbs has to re-take his Bar exam, and maybe even the English mid-school exam: “related” and “joined” are not only different legal concepts, but by no means are associated words in English.

If you don’t believe me, read this argument (the entire document is embedded below): you won’t believe your eyes either. Certainly, Gibbs has to re-take his Bar exam, and maybe even the English mid-school exam: “related” and “joined” are not only different legal concepts, but by no means are associated words in English. Morgan Pietz is improperly pursuing publicity by feeding information to our sites. No comment. Does Gibbs believe in this nonsense himself?

Though the undersigned stands by every word he said therein, Mr. Pietz has committed a grievous ethical violation by not only publishing those emails as an exhibit to his Administrative Motion to Relate Cases in the Northern District and the instant Supplement to Notice of Related Cases, but also providing the email exchange to the fightcopyrighttrolls.com website. Will someone with a patience of a nursery teacher explain to Brett that the document in question is public, available through Pacer and archive.org. Also, Morgan Pietz runs his very own, quite popular, website, and many filings can be found there. No, Morgan Pietz did not send me anything. There was no need to do that. Court filings, unless sealed, are in the public domain. Should I repeat it one more time? Public. Moreover, Arstechnica published the emails in question independently approximately at the same time: this reputable media outlet always cites the original source of information. Fightcopyrighttrolls.com was not cited, which means that the author wrote his piece based on his own research, and I was not even the one who tipped him.

Since you know that, Brett, and premeditatedly attempt to mislead judges, I urge you to look into a mirror ASAP and check the length of your nose before going outdoors: I’m sure you’ll decide to stay home to avoid public embarrassment.

In the past Mr. Gibbs referred to our sites in footnotes, and a busy judge might or might not have followed the link (most likely not). This time he mentions fightcopyrighttrolls.com and dietrolldie.com in such an intriguing way, that I surely expect a visit from court clerks, and maybe judges. It was never a secret that one of our major goals is to widely publicize the bastardization of the judicial system, fraud, and extortion that copyright trolls commit: letting judges read about our grassroots resistance to the unprecedented law abuse is a nice early Christmas Gift. Thank you, Brett.

And the main questions, asked by Morgan Pietz, are not only unanswered, but not even mentioned! Forget the Bar exam, forget a mid-school English exam. Here we talk about basic language comprehension, which any citizen of the United States should master. For readers’ and Brett’s convenience, I repeat these questions:

Is there another Alan Cooper, other than the gentleman in Minnesota who was John Steele’s former caretaker, who is or was the principal of AF Holdings, LLC and/or Ingenuity 13, LLC?; Will plaintiff’s counsel Brett Gibbs produce the original signature to the verified petition, supposedly executed by hand by “Alan Cooper” and notarized, which Mr. Gibbs stated, under penalty of perjury, that he has a copy of in his own possession and control? See In the Matter of a Petition by Ingenuity 13, LLC, E.D. Cal. Case No. 2:11-mc-JAM-DAD, ECF No. 1, 10/28/11; Will Mr. Gibbs identify his client contact at Ingenuity 13 and AF Holdings, given that Mr. Gibbs purported to speak with his “client” at Ingenuity 13 only two weeks ago?

Last, but not least: While Mr. Gibbs proudly signs his tantrum document as a “Prenda Law, Inc.” employee, he (and the judges) should probably be reminded that this corporation is NOT in good standing with the state of Illinois, and its crooked bosses are in the process of pulling a machination — abandoning the old corporation (most likely, to avoid writing the annual report and to get rid of bad publicity) and creating another one — with the same people, same mailing address, same website and same goal — mass extortion.

TAC’s greeting to judges

Given my strong believe (as I speculated above) that we may welcome some court clerks/judges here soon, I think it is absolutely appropriate to pull a recent TAC’s comment from a different (yet related) discussion thread and embed it it here:

Greetings your Honor, I would like to hope that after the name of this blog was brought up that you would come visit us poor ‘misguided’ souls. Sadly, our character is being assassinated by the lawyers who are extorting cash from senior citizens, so one hopes you will consider the source. This is one of several blogs/website/et al., where people targeted by copyright trolls can get an education about the scam. We help Does to stop operating in fear, and understand the legal system and how it is being abused to allow them to be harassed. I might be crass, foul mouthed, and a litany of bad things… but I don’t extort people by abusing the legal system. I have little respect for the lawyers who run these scams, and it shows. I have little respect for some Judges who feel these lawyers are doing nothing wrong, how one can say that when the Federal Courts are being cheated out of millions in filing fees boggles the imagination. The sheer volume of information presented here, should raise serious concerns in your mind about the case before you. The unanswered questions, the blatant forum shopping, the abuse of the legal system, and the desire to not actually pursue these cases is obvious and clear. I hope if you have any questions you’ll ask, we have a pretty good research “team” at your disposal. A majority of them are people who survived troll attacks, and now help others avoid falling prey to them. We are even more expert than the expert who signed off on the IP addresses at the heart of this case, we can back up our claims with fact… not sure about their expert being able to do such. But then we aren’t paid from each “settlement” reached like their expert, we have ethics and morals. Enjoy your stay, I remain… TAC

Updates

I learned about this motion from the Brett Gibbs’s Motion for Sanctions described in the next bullet point. Therefore, a quick question to Brett: should I be mad at Morgan Pietz for not sending this document to me directly in order to advance his publicity agenda? Morgan did not even notify me! This is outrageous that I had to spend $1.80 to fetch this document from Pacer. I consider joining your motion for sanctions and demanding my $1.80 back!

On 12/17/2012 Brett Gibbs filed a motion for sanctions against a “serial filer” (oh irony!) Morgan Pietz, basically reiterating the same delusional accusations as in the document embedded above (except, maybe, for the motion length, the only argument that has a merit, yet it does not warrant sanctions in any sane court). In this motion Brett not only prompts — he begs Judge Write to visit this site. A quick reminder: Judge Write has already labeled copyright trolls’ — including Prenda Law — practice as “extortion”) .

Brett Gibbs filed a motion for sanctions against a “serial filer” (oh irony!) Morgan Pietz, basically reiterating the same delusional accusations as in the document embedded above (except, maybe, for the motion length, the only argument that has a merit, yet it does not warrant sanctions in any sane court). In this motion Brett not only prompts — he Judge Write to visit this site. A quick reminder: Judge Write has already labeled copyright trolls’ — including Prenda Law — practice as “extortion”) . On 12/19/2012 I checked my inbox: Last time I communicated with attorney Morgan Pietz by any means: 11/9/2012. Number of emails with Morgan Pietz on Alan Cooper subject: 0 (zero, cero, die Null, אֶפֶס, nil, صِفْر, nolla, ゼロ, ноль, 零). You may accuse me of lying about it, Brett Gibbs, but I was never caught deliberately telling lies. You were — on multiple occasions. You are a miserable funny little man with a long nose, Brett Gibbs.

I checked my inbox: On 12/20/2012 Judge Write issues an Order to show cause (lack of service):

Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why Defendant has not been timely served. Plaintiff has 7 days to comply with this order; or if Defendant have been served, Plaintiff has 7 days to file the proof of service. Failure to respond will result in dismissal of this action. It seems to me that Judge Write, although clearly understanding what kind of serial fraudsters he deals with, does not want to get his hands dirty and address Coopergate. I hope I’m wrong and we will hear more from him or other judges “forum shopped” by Prenda and its fake clients. Still I experience a slight Schadenfreude that these 7 days fall to the holiday week. Happy holidays, Pinocchio!

Judge Write issues an Order to show cause (lack of service): On 12/21/2012 Judge Write denies Gibbs’s motion for sanctions mentioned in an earlier update to this post. Without explanation (does anyone really need one?). Without even waiting for Morgan Pietz to file his opposition. Quite telling.

Judge Write denies Gibbs’s motion for sanctions mentioned in an earlier update to this post. Without explanation (does anyone really need one?). Without even waiting for Morgan Pietz to file his opposition. Quite telling. On 1/23/2013 DieTrolDie’s “torpedo” hit the target.

Followups