Righthaven to Fed Judge: My dog ate my Court representations

Update: Trailblazing attorney, Todd Kincannon of The Kincannon Firm announced he is accepting past and present Righthaven defendants as new clients for class action ( mass action) litigation against Righthaven, its media clients, and others involved in the Righthaven operation.

If you have been sued by Righthaven, even if you have already settled your case, you are invited to call or email. Cases will be taken on contingency, meaning if there is no recovery, clients will not have to pay for The Kincannon Firm’s services.

If you are interested, call The Kincannon Firm at 877-99-COURT or email Todd@TheKincannonFirm.com.

Righthaven's shameless disregard for facts in its arrogant answer to a Nevada federal judge demanding the troll show cause why it should not be sanctioned for concealing its lawsuit mill may spell its doom

By Michael Leon

Righthaven has targeted and unsuccessfully sued our veterans, but now this Internet troll has to defend its intentional misrepresentations to a federal judge who demanded satisfactory answers or sanctions against this deceitful band of liars.

Righthaven said in reply that a "former in house counsel" and its failure to appreciate the federal court rules are the culprit for misrepresentations made in federal court.

That won't fly.

Attorneys are expected to file as facts and representations to the Court, factual contentions that have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery.

Righthaven Victims, which monitors and challenges this troll, quotes its response:

"Their only answer was this unnamed rogue in-house counsel screwed up. "

For the foregoing reasons, Righthaven respectfully requests that the Court find its failure to comply with Local Rule 7.1-1 through its former in house counsel does not rise to the level of sanctionable conduct given the circumstances described herein. Moreover, Righthaven has taken corrective action in response to the Court’s June 14th Order by filing amended disclosure statements in almost 120 pending cases in within this District and within the District of Colorado. Dated this 28th day of June, 2011.

Moreover, as noted by writer Steve Green, "Righthaven – which sues over alleged online infringements of Las Vegas Review-Journal and Denver Post material – responded Wednesday that [federal Judge Roger] Hunt’s 'factually brazen' commentary 'inaccurately implies that Righthaven intentionally failed to comply' with the disclosure rule."

So, Righthaven lies over 270 times in federal court and when a federal judge calls them and its attorneys on it, its response is the federal judge is being "factually brazen."

Eric Goldman, who has commented on Righthaven's lawsuit mill, writes in a comment at Righthaven Vicitms:

There are two parts that are characteristically disingenuous. First, Mangano throws [attorneys] Coons and Chu under the bus, but [Righthaven's Steve] Gibson signed the Democratic Underground complainttoo. Second, this motion only addresses the Democratic Underground filing, but what about the 270+ other complaints that were equally defective--some of which Mangano signed himself? Righthaven can't blame Coons and Chu for all of those.

Goldman's blog has excellent analysis on recent developments.

Bottom-line: Wronghaven is going down.

Fed Judge rules Righthaven lacks standing to sue, threatens sanctions over misrepresentations

Update II: Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) Statement

Update: Text of Righthaven v. Democratic Underground, [Case No. 2:10-cv-01356 (D. Nev.)], in which the Court held that Righthaven does not have standing to sue Democratic Underground and that Righthaven faces sanctions.

Wisconsin citizen, Michael Leon, prevailed on April 20 - Now, Wronghaven and Attorney Shawn Mangano are found "disingenuous, if not outright deceitful,” says U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt

"A federal judge in Las Vegas today issued a potentially-devastating ruling against copyright enforcer Righthaven LLC, finding it doesn't have standing to sue over Las Vegas Review-Journal stories, that it has misled the court and threatening to impose sanctions against Righthaven," writes Steve Green at the Las Vegas Sun.

Righthaven LLC is an Internet troll,  "a bottom feeding legal outfit -- [that] has teamed up with the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Denver Post to sue 'mom and pop' websites, advocacy and public interest groups and forum board operators for copyright violations," writes the Righthaven Victims site.

Righthaven also has targeted numerous disabled military veterans in its particularly repulsive cookie-cutter lawsuit operation, making systemic misrepresentations against multiple co-defendants.

All of Righthaven's cases were stayed in the Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit by Senior U.S. District Judge John Kane in Denver on May 19.

Reports Steve Green.

"Because there are serious questions as to whether my exercise of subject matter jurisdiction over Righthaven’s claim of copyright infringement is proper, I think it most prudent to stay the proceedings in all pending cases in this district in which Righthaven is the named plaintiff," Kane wrote in an order filed today [May 19]. "Should I find that I lack subject matter jurisdiction over Righthaven’s claim of copyright infringement, it is likely that I will be required to dismiss all pending actions. A stay will best conserve the parties’ and the court’s resources pending resolution of this fundamental inquiry."

In other Righthaven news, Righthaven's crusade against a 20-year Veteran nurse, Denise Nichols, drew her response filed in federal court.

Nichols whose case was terminated May 6 is seeking attorneys' fees, joining potentially 100s of defendants nationwide.

Nichols writes:

Displaying the same stubborn posture Righthaven LLC has shown this Court and the same reckless disregard for facts, Righthaven again distorts the record in this matter.

On April 20, due to Righthaven’s carelessness admitted to in its STATUS REPORT TO HEARING … for April 20 [FILED 04-18-2011], this Court declared at the beginning of the hearing that the cases against defendant Leon and co-defendant Nichols would be dismissed. The Court did not predicate this directive upon whether Righthaven 'would consent to dismissal with or without prejudice.' It made the directive and order clear at the April 20 hearing, irrespective of what Righthaven wished.

This Court left it to the defendants – as prevailing parties - to decide whether the dismissal would be with or without prejudice.
Facing life-threatening medical issues, I entered into good-faith negotiations with the plaintiff who admits in its April 20 Status Report that 'Righthaven’s Complaint apparently did not name Denise Nichols (‘Nichols’) as a defendant in this action.' ...

Righthaven took this Court’s ruling as an opportunity to engage in bad-faith negotiations before terminating the frivolous suit on May 6, through its Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, and then opposing my effort to obtain the very low amount of $1,600 in attorneys’ fees, which I now request.

To review Righthaven’s behavior in this case, it bears noting the following facts:

• Righthaven served Denise Nichols with a complaint that fails to mention Nichols
• Righthaven’s cookie cutter lawsuits made misrepresentations in this case against multiple co-defendants, arguing two separate Venues for alleged infringements that are simply not credible. In one complaint against co-defendant Medbillz, Righthaven names the United States District Court for the Southern District of California as venue. In another complaint served on Leon, Righthaven says the proper venue is the United States District Court, District of Nevada.
• Righthaven failed to serve defendant Leon within 120 days
• Reading Righthaven’s tortured April 20 Report, Righthaven also claims that 'Righthaven filed the Amended Complaint in this action by mistake.' (p.2)

Righthaven says I am attempting to ask the Court for a sum to which I am not entitled, though in its opposition Righthaven admits the mistakes are Righthaven’s not mine.

The reason I am responding pro se is I simply cannot afford money for another attorney and Righthaven as made it clear in my co-defendant’s pro bono case that it will oppose any and all claims for attorneys’ fees and costs.

Righthaven's Crusade Against 20-year Veteran Nurse Gets Worse

Wronghaven!—Righthaven Calls Veteran's Motion Seeking Attys' Fees for Suit Mistakenly Served Upon Her: An Effort to "extract blood money"

Denise Nichols Fights for Veterans

via mal contends—Few attorneys and defendants who have dealt with Internet troll, Righthaven LLC and its attorney, Shawn Mangano, are surprised by their duplicity and blatant abuse of process of the federal court system.

Now, Righthaven just dove deeper into the pond scum in its vendetta against an Air Force nurse (my former co-defendant), a veteran fighting for her life against Gulf War Syndrome, and life-threatening ailments--believed by this medical professional to be exacerbated by Righthaven's frivolous federal lawsuit for $150,000 and attorneys' fees.

Though veteran Denise Nichols persists in her work of helping fellow veterans, Righthaven won't halt its legal efforts against her.

Righthaven served Nichols, of Denver, Colorado, with a federal complaint earlier this year that was ordered to be dismissed on April 20 by federal Judge Gloria M. Navarro.

The complaint, in a reflection of the often shoddy work of Attorney Shawn Mangano and Righthaven generally, fails to mention Denise Nichols in the text of the complaint, even once.

Subsequent bad-faith negotiations by Righthaven ensued in which Righthaven tried to induce Nichols to sign a press release with language describing how generous and thoughtful Righthaven is to veterans and the disabled, a la the case against North Carolina blogger Brian D. Hill.

After dismissal negotiations failed, Righthaven was forced to terminate its suit against Nichols May 6 or face Judge Navaro again.

Nichols then filed a motion for $1,600 in attorneys' fees that she paid to Attorneys John Arsenault of Colorado and Mike Kimbrell of Nevada. Even these facts are disputed by Righthaven.

Both attorneys agreed the Righthaven suit lacked any merit as a defendant is of course to be mentioned in a complaint if she is accused a tort.

Reads Nichols' motion is part: "The Complaint, which was served upon defendant, Denise Nichols, on 03/23/2011, is predicated upon a likely Rule 11 violation as the plaintiff admits the complaint fails to mention the defendant in the text of the complaint, as indicated in the plaintiff's summary report (filed April 18) for the April 20 hearing at which your Honor ruled the case was to be dismissed."

In a Court filing this week, Righthaven responded by saying of Nichols' motion "it is nothing short of an attempt at trying to extract blood money in the form of an attorney's fee award to which she is not entitled."

Righthaven's position is that Nichols is not entitled to recoup attorneys' fee though she was served with a complaint that does not mention her.

Nichols, who had to appear by telephone at an April 20 federal Court hearing from a DC Veterans' Medical facility, continues her fight for her life and those of her fellow veterans.

Nichols said yesterday she is composing her response to Mangano and Righthaven's outrageous "blood money" charge and will file it this weekend.

Maj. Denise Nichols (ret), Vietnam era and Gulf War veteran, retired nurse, MSN, retired US Air Force Flight Nurse Clinical specialist in cardio-vascular nursing, served on the nursing faculty of several universities around the country.

"I think Righthaven has this backwards. Righthaven and Mangano are after blood money. They are harming people and lying about it. The idea that I, along with other prevailing defendants, are after 'blood money' for Righthaven's mistakes and abuse is absurd," said Nichols today.

Whiteknight Law Firms Fight for Free Speech

Update: Righthaven and Stephens Media Amend Strategic Alliance Agreement in tacit admission of its inadequacy. Santangelo Law Offices, PC conintues to kick Righthaven's ass. And Righthaven Victims is leading the way on the Net.

Steve Green at the Vegas Sun has the latest on Rigthaven, the Internet troll, and the collection of lawyers, writers and activists working for free speech and justice.

The Democratic Underground is represented by some of the top copyright attorneys in the West associated with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, [Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati] which has been pounding away at Righthaven’s litigation campaign and convinced another judge to unseal Righthaven’s lawsuit contract with Review-Journal owner Stephens Media LLC. ...

The Media Bloggers Association is represented by copyright experts with Randazza Legal Group in the West as well as New York copyright attorney Ron Coleman.

Righthaven Case Against MAL Dismissed

Thanks to the work of an array of brilliant attorneys and friends, [hat tip to J. Malcolm DeVoy of Randazza Legal Group], Righthaven's case against me was dismissed (without prejudice) this morning by the Honorable Judge Gloria M. Navarro, United States District Court for the District of Nevada.

See Righthaven LLC v. Michael Leon, et al; Civil Action No 2:10-CV-01672-GMM-LRN.

The status of litigation against my co-defendant, Denise Nichols, a Vietnam-era, Gulf War veteran, and a retired U.S. Air Force flight nurse—who spends her time when not fighting off ailments sustained in the '91 Gulf War—helping other veterans is not yet clear.

Nichols' attorney, a respected former JAG attorney, is fighting the good fight.

Nichols listened to this morning's proceedings by phone from a D.C. veterans' hospital.

The strain of the case by Righthaven LLC on Nichols is heavy, and to be candid, I'm worried about her. She's too proud to say it; but her health is suffering badly.

Denise Nichols deserves better.

Being a defendant in a federal lawsuit is no picnic. But I'm lucky. I have encountered so many dedicated, brilliant and humanistic people since being served with a summons on March 6, that I truly feel rejuvenated.

Righthaven LLC hinted they may bring a libel or defamation suit against me for God knows what reason. I think they didn't like my references to and citing from the Democratic Underground's case against Righthaven, and my standing with Nichols.

In any event, this site is committed to the defense of Denise Nichols, whose perseverance, support and grace through this ordeal has left me both inspired and humbled.

To Denise: You have a lot of more friends than you may know. We will stay in touch, and I am proud to stand with you.

Anyone wishing to support Nichols with legal advice or financial assistance can reach me at: malleon@live.com. I will make sure that Denise and her team gets what is sent.

Kurt Opsahl: Righthaven lacks exclusive copyright ownership of Stephens Media news articles

Wronghaven

Read supporting documents at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, including Righthaven's secret Strategic Alliance Agreement that Righthaven fought to keep from public view. Righthaven LLC is threatening to sue MAL for defending veteran Maj Denise Nichols (ret) and attacking Righthaven's inclination to ... sue.

Commentary by Kurt Opsahl in the Electronic Frontier Foundation:

For several weeks EFF and co-counsel Fenwick & West have been trying to persuade a federal district court to unseal a critical document Stephens Media produced in Righthaven v. Democratic Underground. The document, the Strategic Alliance Agreement between Righthaven and Stephens Media (publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal), and our accompanying supplemental brief were unsealed on [last] Friday.

As the court explained, “Righthaven and Stephens Media have attempted to create a cottage industry of filing copyright claims, making large claims for damages and then settling claims for pennies on the dollar, with defendants who do not want to incur the costs of defending the lawsuits.” While Righthaven’s business is suing bloggers for copyright infringement, it is not a publisher. It does not produce the works that are the basis for its numerous lawsuits. Instead, it trolls the Internet, looking for news articles published by Stephens Media (Las Vegas Review-Journal) or Media News Group ( Denver Post) and, when it finds them, gets the publisher to “assign” the copyright so it can file a lawsuit. At least, that was the public story.

Getting this assignment right was essential because copyright law does not permit a person to sue for infringement unless that person’s own copyrights (e.g., the rights to reproduce and distribute a work) are actually being infringed. In other words, you have to have some real skin in the game. Thus, in each lawsuit, Righthaven alleged ownership of the copyright rights. ...

As the Court correctly noted, “consider[ing] the multitude of cases filed by Righthaven, on the claimed basis that Righthaven owns the copyrights to certain Stephens Media copy, it appears to the Court that there is certainly an interest and even a right in all the other defendants sued by Plaintiff to have access to this material.” Now that the Agreement is public, Stephens Media and Righthaven have a lot of explaining to do. Per the Court’s order, the companies might start by explaining why the Strategic Alliance Agreement does not torpedo their case against Democratic Underground (their justification is due by May 8). We look forward to responding.