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.

Too Busy to Meet Terms: Righthaven Files for Extension to Comply with July 14 Order

Righthaven appears too busy to comply with Judge Hunt's recent July 14 ruling, specifically with Local Rule 7.1-1, which requires the disclosure of interested parties in all actions. This includes providing each party with a copy of Judge Hunt's June 14, order, the transcript from the July 14 hearing, a copy of any order from the July 14 hearing to all parties involving Stephens Media and a copy of the Strategic Alliance Agreement (SAA). The application for extension requests 10 additional days.

Righthaven’s counsel has diligently investigated the number and nature of Righthaven’s pending cases concerning Stephens Media. Counsel has identified seventy-eight (78) cases that appear to fall within the Court’s Order. Counsel’s investigation has further revealed that service of process has not been made in a significant number of these cases. Counsel’s investigation has been extremely time consuming and has also been impacted by numerous pending responses dates in a significant number of Righthaven and non-Righthaven matters. In short, performing the degree of due diligence required vastly exceed the amount of time counsel anticipated dedicating to this portion of complying with the Court’s Order.

See: Application for Extension in full

In part 6, the document adds, "As of now, counsel still is investigating how to provide non-served parties with the materials required under the Order." In the past, Righthaven has wrongly served, not served on time or not served defendants at all. As stated not long ago by observer Eric Goldman, "I don't know if it's their staff turnover, general incompetence or something else, but Righthaven has made a surprisingly high number of unforced errors for a company whose sole business is litigation."