Legal Fight Against Net Troll Moves to Its Parasite Lawyer, Shawn Mangano

Image - Leon

Update: Deadline Passes on Paying Decorated Vietnam War Vet, Wayne Hoehn: Defendant Again Asks Judge to Allow Seizure of Righthaven's Assets

Wayne Hoehn was awarded $34,045 in attorneys’ fees and cost against a deceitful, fraudulent Internet troll, Righthaven LLC, that threatens to throw the sleazy outfit into bankruptcy.

After a series of Righthaven shenanigans dodging this Vietnam veteran’s judgement and those of other prevailing defendants, Hoehn's attorneys have had enough and have filed an extraordinary sanctions motion against Righthaven's attorney, Shawn Mangano.

By Michael Leon

Randazza Legal Group, Hoehn's attorneys and this writer's [who prevailed over Righthaven], also represent other victimized clients in their intellectual property and First Amendment law practice and have won case after case against Righthaven.

Righthaven seems to have a thing for ripping off veterans; just ask Denise Nichols. See also veterans come together to fight Righthaven.

Another ongoing case involves Righthaven victim, NewsBlaze LLC. Chief U.S. District Court for Nevada Judge Robert C. Jones, "said he planned to dismiss the NewsBlaze case based on Righthaven’s lack of standing." (Green. Vegas Inc)

Righthaven's MO is that it pretends to hold copyrights, claims federal copyright violations, serves defendants federal lawsuits and tries to scare defendants into a settlement.

Despite losing case after case, Righthaven's attorney, Shawn Mangano, is still proposing arguments so intellectually dishonest that he personally has garnered this sanctions motion.

Righthaven’s shake-down operation has already earned it sanctions by a federal judge ruling that Righthaven has not acquired copyrights, and its contentions are “flagrantly false,” “disingenuous,” if not “deceitful.” [U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt]

Righthaven has filed some 275 federal copyright lawsuits claiming text from the Las Vegas Review-Journal and [formerly] the Denver Post has been used without regard to copyright law by the Internet users including bloggers and message board posters.

Righthaven's con game is now blown, so its objective now is to irritate and annoy prevailing defendants, while driving up their legal costs unreasonably and vexatiously [with the purpose to annoy] by making arguments already rejected in endless proceedings, and then declaring bankruptcy.

I have experienced the downfall of Righthaven on a personal level as a prevailing defendant [it's my fervent hope that Righthaven feels sorry it ever met me] and I can tell you that a score of socially minded attorneys who defended veterans, Tea Party members, the Democratic Underground and many others across the nation deserve the thanks of all Americans who believe in liberty.

Writes Steve Green:

... Randazza attorneys wrote in their sanctions motion Tuesday that, 'Righthaven’s scheme has been rejected nationwide.'

'Yet, only days away from Halloween, the defendants in this action continue to bear the costs of litigation establishing Righthaven’s lack of standing,' their filing said.

'Righthaven and its counsel have a duty to dismiss this case, and not to waste the court’s time or the defendant’s time and resources in making the exact same arguments, which have been rejected again, and again, and again and again,' the Randazza filing said.

Randazza attorney J. Malcolm DeVoy IV complained that in the Hoehn case and in another suit against Michael Leon, in which Righthaven was ordered to pay $3,815 in fees, Righthaven 'has evinced a reticence to pay.'

He charged that while Righthaven has appealed several adverse rulings, it has yet to file an opening brief in its first appeal that was due Sept. 19.

'This appeal appears to be another stall tactic for Righthaven to deny the defendant in that case, and the First Amendment principles its fair use victory embraces, any finality,' DeVoy’s brief said.

Argues DeVoy in his brief:

Righthaven abused the Copyright Act by using it as a pretense for extortive litigation, suing defendants for damages up to $150,000 without having the right to bring the case, and without so much as considering the defendants’ fair use rights.2 Righthaven’scampaign has been an abject failure; even its own client publicly referred to it as a “dumb idea.”3 If a party or lawyer is expected to read the metaphorical “writing on the wall,” that party and that lawyer should be expected to take note when the wall collapses and falls upon them, leaving nothing more than a dusty pile of litigation rubble. In this case, Righthaven not only seems to insist that the wall has not fallen, but does so while still hurling the dislodged stones at this defendant. It must stop.
2. 2 See Righthaven v. Nat’l Org. for Reform of Marijuana Laws, Case No. 2:10-cv- 00351 (Doc. #30) (D. Nev. June 4,2010) (accepting offer of judgment for $2,815 in satisfaction of infringement claim); Righthaven v. Rawlings et al.,Case No. 2:10-cv-01527 (Doc. # 25) (D. Nev. June 28, 2011) (settling Righthaven’s infringement claim for $1,000, at a rate of $100 per month).
3. John Paton, New Chief Executive Of Media News Group Says Joining Righthaven Was "A Dumb Idea", The Huffington Post (Sept. 10, 2011)

Another champion covering Righthaven's fraud saga is Righthaven Victims:

Writes Fairuser:

Defendants' Newsblaze LLC and Alan Gray filed a motion in federal court Tuesday asking the court to impose sanctions on Shawn Mangano, counsel for Righthaven LLC for "unreasonably and vexatiously multiplying the proceedings" in their case. The defendants say they bring the motion reluctantly, but believe Righthaven's litigation campaign in their case has gone "beyond zealous advocacy" and has become "vexatious, unnecessarily multiplicative, and purposely wasteful." Defendants ask the court to impose sanctions of $11,925.50 -- the amount of defendants' attorneys' fees since July 2011. [Quoting DeVoy]:

Though sought with great reservation, the facts of this case and Mangano’s conduct across numerous cases in this district cry out for the imposition of sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927. Months after Righthaven’s lack of standing was determined by the Democratic Underground court and confirmed by at least six other decisions in this District, Righthaven’s counsel still requires defendants to litigate the same precluded issues, either seeking to create inconsistent precedent or punish assertive defendants who do not wish to settle. Whether this strategy was Mangano’s or Righthaven’s (to which Mangano acceded), it is ultimately Righthaven’s Counsel who decides what arguments are presented to the Court – and must bear the consequences of those actions.

See: Defendants' Motion for Sanctions Against Counsel

Partial list of attorneys fighting against Righthaven LLC

• David Kerr
• J. Malcolm DeVoy IV of the Randazza Legal Group)
• Marc J. Randazza, counsel of record and lead attorneyRandazza Legal Group
• Todd Kincannon of The Kincannon Firm
• Electronic Frontier Foundation
• Fenwick and West LLP,
• Las Vegas attorney, Chad Bowers
• Mike Kimbrell of Nevada
• John Arsenault of Colorado
• Laurence Pulgram
• Kurt Opsahl
• Clyde DeWitt
• Jason Schultz

I Vanquished a Notorious Internet Troll, Righthaven LLC

The Billionaire-backed ‘copyright enforcer’ became a cautionary tale not for claimed Internet-copy infringers like bloggers, but rather for law-suit mills and deceitful trolls like Righthaven LLC filing some 275 federal copyright complaints, typically for $75,000-$150,000 since March 2010



Righthaven LLC [Image - Michael Leon]

 By Michael Leon

Madison, Wisconsin—On March 6, 2011 my girlfriend and I were watching True Blood and some idiot pounded on the door so loudly my girlfriend jumped off the coach.

"Mike, don't get that. You don't who that is," she said.

"I'm going to find out," I said.

I opened the door fast onto our porch, and demanded "Who the f__k are you" to which a wormy-looking man sheepishly stepped away, replying he was "just doing his job," laying Civil Action No 2:20-CV-01672, federal copyright complaint filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, at my feet and quickly leaving.

Turns out I was a victim of Righthaven LLC, as certified in the complaint by one Steven A. Gibson, CEO and founder of Righthaven and Shawn Mangano, attorney of record in the service papers.

Righthaven is a LLC that has filed some 275 federal copyright lawsuits claiming text from the Las Vegas Review-Journal and the Denver Post has been used without regard to copyright law by the Internet users including bloggers and message board posters.

Righthaven is half owned by another LLC controlled by Las Vegas attorney and Righthaven CEO Steven Gibson, and half owned by a third LLC owned by the family of Little Rock, Arkansas investment banking billionaire Warren Stephens.

My complaint alleges a copyright violation for a piece on veterans in Veterans Today in 2010 that also appeared in a paper over which Righthaven claimed it "is the owner of the copyright" several times in the complaint—a claim of ownership replicated in the some 274 other complaints and which last week was proven false, ruled to be "deceitful," and is the cause of the stern, vocal beating by Chief Justice Roger Hunt (District of Nevada) July 15, who fined Righthaven $5,000 for repeatedly misleading the Court on this representation of copyright ownership.

Steve Green of the Las Vegas Sun, reports, "[Judge] Hunt ordered ... that a transcript of today’s hearing, in which he made several negative comments about Righthaven’s conduct, be posted on Righthaven court dockets" in the District of Nevada.

Moreover, ominously, Green reports: Judge Hunt said, "In the court’s view, the arrangement between Righthaven and Stephens Media is nothing more, nor less, than a law firm — which incidentally I don’t think is licensed to practice law in this state — with a contingent fee agreement masquerading as a company."

The win

It didn't take long for me to file an answer, along with several motions, the pedestrian nature of which likely taxed the patience of United States District Court Judge Gloria Maria Navarro.

On April 14, attorneys for the Democratic Underground, a future prevailing defendant, won a motion to unseal the Strategic Alliance Agreement between Righthaven and Stephens Media that, in sum, proved Righthaven had no standing to sue due to its lack ownership of the copyright, and that Steven A. Gibson misrepresented and concealed this relationship in the some 200 federal court cases.

I had been negotiating on the phone with Righthaven’s counsel that week wondering vaguely if this attorney, Shawn Mangano, were as duplicitous and delusional as I had been informed by an intellectual property attorney whose practice is in the Midwest.

I told Mangano over the phone and in e-mails what I thought of his lawsuit mill.

So, on April 18, I secured the pro bono services of Marc Randazza and J. Malcolm DeVoy of the Randazza Legal Group.

Mangano became so upset that I was accusing him and Righthaven of lying and engaging in abuse of process that he threatened me with a defamation suit in an e-mail and publically in our April 20 hearing before U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro.

"I’m not going to tolerate and allow someone to tarnish my professional reputation" – or make libelous claims about Righthaven and [Righthaven attorney Steve Ganim],” Mangano said.

"Mr. Mangano's reference to libel indicates a lurid conception of the term," [I] said in response after the hearing, writes Steve Green at Vegas Inc.

On April 20, I appeared by telephone from Madison with my co-defendant, a 20-year veteran nurse who reached the court from a D.C. VA medical center, Denise Nichols, who was served with a $150,000 complaint failing to mention her once.

I won. My case was dismissed, with an opportunity to seek attorneys' fees and costs. Long story short, my attorneys won as well, and Righthaven has to pay up legal fees owed by July 25th.

The case against Nichols was discharged by Righthaven which filed and ran.

An amended complaint (filed 11/24/2010) against another of my co-defendants, an organization complaint says is of "unknown orgin," Medbillz, was certified by Gibson to be rightfully litigated in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of California as an "appropriate venue;" my venue was claimed to belong in Nevada.

Two other I/P attorneys laughed when I told them of this ruse by Righthaven and Gibson claiming two different venues simultaneously.

After the case was dismissed, Righthaven's attorney, Shawn Mangano, phoned me from Nevada and unleashed a stream of invectives at about 4:20 P.M. Central time [I log and document such items when dealing with Righthaven].

Made for an amusing conversation; but I sincerely was concerned about Mangano suffering a stroke in the Nevada heat though he phoned from some outfit entitled "Investors Realt [cut off]" on caller ID. Made some other significant, shall I say, documentation of the phone call

This month I became the first defendant to be awarded attorneys’ fees from Righthaven to J. Malcolm Devoy of the Randazza Legal Group, a First Amendment firm located in Las Vegas.

Fair Use law

The wins for the defendants piling up through the efforts of committed, public-mined attorneys like David Kerr of Santangelo Law Offices, PC, Devoy and Randazza of the Randazza Legal Group, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the law firm of Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich and Rosati, Kurt Opsahl, Chad Bowers, and Laurence Pulgram and Fenwick and West LLP, and Todd Kincannon are only part of the real story here.

The fair use policy rationale behind Copyright law may be the big winner in Righthaven's 18-month reign of legal terror.

A first year law student will report, in essence, that copyright law ought to promote the dissemination of the arts and science and protect the exclusive right of authors and inventors to benefit from their works by virtue of their authorship.

Reading of Righthaven's campaign of finding alleged infringements for the sole purpose of filing suit and terrorizing defendants into settlements clarifies there is a social purpose in copyright law in fairly using another work, if not for commercial gain or resulting in market harm, but rather advancing discussion, comment and analysis.

Righthaven sees copyrights as a business model to be used in an innovative and dishonestly conceived law suit mill.

They were very wrong to try.

As U.S. District Judge John Kane ruled on motion from Righthaven on April 11, (later staying all 58 Righthaven lawsuits filed in Colorado), “[T]he purpose of the courts is to provide a forum for the orderly, just, and timely resolution of controversies and disputes. Plaintiff’s wishes to the contrary, the courts are not merely tools for encouraging and exacting settlements from Defendants cowed by the potential costs of litigation and liability.”

My attorney Devoy writes in a motion on behalf of prevailing defendant, Vietnam War veteran, Wayne Hahn [LLC v. Wayne Hoehn; Case No. 2:11-cv-00050. Memorandum of Law and Points of Authorities, filed July 7, 2011]:

[L]ike hundreds of other Righthaven victims, Hoehn contemplated his options upon being sued. Should he cave in and write Righthaven a check, or should he risk his savings to stand up for what he knew was right?

Hoehn recalled his [military] oath, and considered the fact that so many others had been sued, and made payments, for what clearly was fair use. Hoehn knew that he could not live up to his oath if he gave up without a fight. Hoehn stood up for fair use – for free speech – and he prevailed.

And so have I, and I’ll being joining the class-action suit by South Carolina attorney, Todd Kincannon, against Righthaven LLC for its abuse of process, fraud and lies, and lodging a complaint with the Nevada Bar against Righthaven's unscrupulous attorneys.
#
- Michael Leon is a writer living in Madison, Wisconsin. His writing has appeared nationally in The Progressive, The Advocate, In These Times and CounterPunch; and locally in the Isthmus and the Capital Times. Leon works as a writer, editor, veterans' advocate, and public relations consultant. He can be reached at: malleon@live.com

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.

Veteran Nurse Seeks Attorneys' Fees from Righthaven

Denise Nichols is seeking $1,600 in attorneys' fees and costs and any other relief the Court deems just from Righthaven which served her with a civil complaint that failed to mention her in the text.

"Righthaven and Attorney Mangano admitted in Court they made a mistake in serving on me a complaint that fails to even mention my name. So, I should pay for their mistake? No. They should pay full attorneys' fees and costs, and that's giving these people a break," said Denise Nichols. "What should happen is Shawn Mangano should be slapped with a Rule 11 violation that sanctions lawyers for misrepresenting facts in federal Court. How can it be reasonable and diligent for attorney Mangano to file with the Court a complaint he has admitted was a mistake? Mangano needs to be stopped."

Nichols' Rule 11 complaint refers to the federal Court Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions rules.

"I say good for Denise Nichols. She's carrying the ball right now on behalf of all veterans and the Internet community. Mangano's negligence is blatant in Denise's case; but when you consider the systemic, organized fraud he has perpetrated on the Court on the matter of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, it's clear justice demands the Court act against not just Righthaven; but also Mangano for failing to meet his responsibilities as an attorney under Rule 11. He fought Denise Nichols the whole way, instead of just admitting his mistake and owning up to it, apologizing to the Court and the veteran, Denise Nichols whom honestly is likely to be alive, no thanks to Mangano," said Michael Leon.

Nichols says she was lucky her attorneys charged her so little out of respect for the injustice of her case, though Righthaven proved unwilling to negotiate a settlement on the case that was terminated on May 14. -- Civil Action No 2:10-CV-01672-GMM-LRN

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."

Said Nichols, "The point is until victims stand up to Righthaven, then this will continue. And the victims that have gone through untold amounts of stress then have to hire attorneys to fight. It is a situation that the courts and judges need to pay attention to but also legislators who need to hold hearings and to possibly review the law as passed to review if changes to the law are necessary. All these steps to protect Freedom of speech and fair use."

Righthaven's Atty, Shawn Mangano, Is Desperate

Notorious Internet troll, Righthaven's Shawn Mangano, is turning into one Scaredy Cat.

After Righthaven saw its case dismissed by the Honorable Judge Gloria M. Navarro on April 20, Righthaven's attorney, Shawn Mangano, phoned me from Nevada and unleashed a stream of invectives at about 4:20 P.M. Central time [I log and document such items when dealing with Righthaven].

Made for an amusing conversation; though I sincerely was concerned about Mangano suffering a stroke in the Nevada heat though he phoned from some outfit entitled "Investors Realt [cut off]" on caller ID. Made some other significant, shall I say, documentation of the phone call.

Now, Righthaven Victims reports at least three legal groups are donating their work pro bono in an apparent bid to rid the profession of these vampires.

In an e-mail to my attorney at the time, J. Malcolm Deyoy of the Randazza Legal Group, Mangano complained about a number of statements made by his-then client, me, embarrassing Mangano repeatedly.

One complaint concerns Righthaven's attorney, Steven Ganim. Ganim is not licensed to practice law in Nevada.

Writing this fact, first reported by Righthaven Victims, [see also Righthaven Turnover Rate Resembles Fast Food Chain Operation, April 18, 2011] made Mangano very angry and threatening.

Writes Mangano to my attorney in a letter dated April 19, "Your client has also disseminated that Mr. Ganim is apparently not a member of the State Bar of Nevada. In doing so, your client has attempted to cast the impression that Mr. Ganim is holding himself out an attorney when he is not licensed to do so. Once again your client is wrong."

Mangano threatened to sue me for libel for telling the truth. Absurd as usual.

Righthaven Victims has a new, related update: "Another Attorney Defending a Righthaven Victim on a Pro Bono basis Seeks Attorney Fees" (May 13).

‘Casting an impression' as libel, a novel interpretation of libel law applied to stating an undisputed fact. So here:

Attorney Mangano of Wronghaven LLC,

Here's what I want from you. I want you to call Ganim and borrow Bar materials on the elements of "libel" and study very hard. You can help Ganim pass the Nevada Bar and kill two birds at once.

Then I want you to study Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11, (b) Representations to the Court and likewise study very hard.

The same for Summary Judgement.

No apologies necessary. Just bone up on the law.

Do not waste the Court's time. Bad form, fella.

Oh, and quit screwing over decorated veterans like Wayne Hoehn. I like that guy.

Righthaven Turnover Rate Resembles Fast Food Chain Restaurant

Distasteful Parasite Resembles Atty Shawn Mangano

From the Righthaven Victims Network:

One Righthaven Attorney  [reportedly] Not Even Registered with the Nevada State Bar

Just how many months can a Righthaven attorney be expected to do the heavy lifting in their ongoing sham copyright claims? According to the Las Vegas Sun, not very long.

Righthaven observers note another attorney for the firm, Anne Pieroni, has left Righthaven for undisclosed reasons. Attorneys John Charles Coons, Joseph Chu and Ikenna Odunze left earlier.

One has to wonder how Righthaven employment on a résumé is perceived by potential new employers? As for the unnamed new [Righthaven] attorney, one has to wonder the questions thrown out in the interview process: Are you up for the task of being a:

• copyright troll
• copyright extortionist
• parasitic bottom feeder
• perpetrating a fraud upon the court
• engaging in unclean hands and more

Are you up to squeezing autistic individuals on a fixed income, or having your correspondences leaked to the media? (Pieroni and Odunze have since left the firm.)

Are you up to "name-calling and saber-rattling" in what observers believe to be a set-up for a recusal motion, which may invite severe consequences? It's unknown how long attorneys Shawn Mangano and Steve Ganim will last.

Attorney Steven Ganim is [reportedly] not even registered as a member of the Nevada State Bar.