Eight More Righthaven Lawsuits Thrown Out; Judge Hicks Does Not Revive Standing Issue

UPDATE 03/02/12: Another day and another ruling against Righthaven from U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks, who dismissed two more lawsuits Friday due to lack of standing: Jeffery Nelson and Hush-Hush Entertainment Inc. and codefendants PN Media Inc. and Andrew Stoddard. Separately, U.S. Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen ordered Righthaven to show cause by March 16th why it should not be sanctioned and held in contempt of court (motion granted to attorneys representing Thomas DiBiase).

03/01/12:
Eight More Righthaven Lawsuits Dismissed

Las Vegas copyright lawsuit filer Righthaven LLC struck out again in court on Thursday when a federal judge in Reno threw out eight more of its lawsuits...
Two of the Nevada judges who have not yet ruled on the standing issue, Hicks and Navarro, for months have kept Righthaven waiting for a decision. Both judges are presiding over multiple Righthaven cases.

U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks ruled on the standing issue Thursday, and he did so by throwing out eight cases. The cases include: Chris Brown Web Network, Fullthrottletv.net, Wehategringos.com, Charles Coker, Gunner’s Alley LLC, Computer Services One LLC, John Kirk and Bob Sieber (May each of your personal lives and businesses finally move on from the "legal terrorism" inflicted by Righthaven!). The remaining Nevada judge to rule on the standing issue is Gloria Navarro.

See: VEGAS INC article in full

Judge Hunt's Response to Extension: Focus on Material Issues, Not 'Wishful Research' Efforts

In response to Righthaven's application for extension, Chief U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt granted the 10 additional days, then scolded the copyright trolling group and again clarified the July 14 order by defining legal terms such as "parties" and "pending matters" for Righthaven. Hunt also wrote that Righthaven's situation is "largely—if not entirely—of his and Righthaven’s own making" and that, "its counsel should concentrate their efforts on material issues and court orders, not wishful research."

First, as Righthaven points out in its motion, when the Court issued the sanctions the Court and counsel referred to “parties,” not merely cases. Accordingly, it is insufficient to merely file the required documents; Righthaven must produce the documents to the parties in those cases as the Court clearly stated. The reason for this is simple: the Court is fully aware of Righthaven’s practice of filing suit against a party and then entering settlement negotiations (and frequently settling) without ever serving the party. The Court concludes that depriving those parties of the benefit of the Court’s order would be unjust.
Second, Righthaven must produce the required documents to all parties in all pending matters. The Court stated that the order would “not apply to those cases that have been dismissed unless there’s going to be an appeal in those cases.” The Court clearly ordered that Righthaven produce these documents in cases that have been dismissed but are later appealed. This logically includes cases that have already been appealed. Further, if there are any pending motions in a case, that case is still pending in some fashion. Accordingly, Righthaven must produce the required documents in those cases as well even if all that remains pending is a request for attorney’s fees or some similar matter.

See: Judge Hunt's Response to Application for Extension

Service of process costs money; yet another fee Righthaven has been trying to avoid when filing their no-warning lawsuits. Hunt knows Righthaven's game and effectively just tightened up the screws.

Judge Hunt Fines Righthaven $5,000 for Misleading Court; 'Masquerading as Company'

Earlier today, VEGAS INC reported in a brief article that U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt fined Righthaven LLC $5,000 for misleading the court about its lawsuits. No attorneys for Righthaven were personally punished by the judge. Shortly thereafter, the newspaper published a follow-up with more details. There were indeed damning aspects of Hunt's ruling, including his belief that Righaven's failure to disclose Stephens Media as an interested party was not an oversight, but intentional.

Judge: Righthaven Masquerading as a Company

Besides the $5,000, Hunt ordered Righthaven to disclose its original lawsuit contract with Stephens Media in active lawsuits over R-J material. He also 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.
--snip--
“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.”

See: Related VEGAS INC article

Blogger Ken Comments on Possible Results of $5,000 Sanction Ordered by Judge Hunt

Righthaven Sanctioned for Lying to a Federal Court

Judge Robert Hunt of the Federal Court of Nevada has issued a rule 11 citation against Righthaven for misleading a Federal Court. The fine is $5000 but the actual result of this will be DEVASTATING to Righthaven. The Nevada State Bar will have to act on this and perhaps even the Nevada Attorney General. Righthaven, Steve Gibson, and Shawn Mangano’s reputations will forever be tarnished. Righthaven is finished.
This stems from a case against the Democratic Underground who was sued by Righthaven over copyright infringement. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) defended the DU against Righthaven. Judge Hunt has already dismissed the case due to lack of standing and now has fined Righthaven for claiming they were the owners of the copyright in question even though Stephens Media only assigned them the bare minimum right to file lawsuits...

See: Blog post in full

However, after gathering a few quick opinions, the concern is that the State Bar of Nevada will drop its investigation. Why get involved after a federal judge has already meted out punishment?