Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

The Dread Pro-Se Kimberlin has had a bit of a mixed week. One judge granted his motions for alternate service of process while another denied a similar motion in another case that relied on the same set of facts. Lynn Thomas, one of the two persons that TDPK claims to be Kimberlin Unmasked, is a subject of both motions. She may now be served by email in the Kimberlin v. The Universe, et al. RICO Madness but not in the Kimberlin v. Kimberlinunmasked copyright trolling lawsuit. As I noted yesterday, that creates a split between judges sitting in the same courthouse.

TDPK also received an additional 54-day delay in the due date of his omnibus opposition to the motions to dismiss in the RICO Madness. Consequently, our defendants’ replies to his opposition are now due on 8 January, 2015, a 52-day delay.

Here’s the net of all that as I see it.

TDPK can now serve three of the remaining unserved defendants in the RICO Madness by email. Given his record to date, there is a significant possibility that he will screw up that service.

The delay in dealing with motions to dismiss in the RICO Madness will result in 7+ weeks of additional Team Kimberlin Posts of the Day discussing that case and related issues. Hello, Streisand Effect!

The 120-day period for service of process in the copyright trolling lawsuit timed out back in July. I would not be surprised if Judge Titus sua sponte dismissed the suit for non-prosecution.

Brett Kimberlin keeps saying that various defendants want to settle the RICO suit. I suppose that’s true in a certain sense. Some of us might be willing to settle if he offered a sufficiently large payment for their troubles and dismissed the suit with prejudice. And that’s probably the best case scenario for him at this point if the judge doesn’t grant our motions to dismiss. Otherwise, we go on to discovery and depositions.


As some day it may happen that a witness must be found,
I’ve got a little list, I’ve got a little list …
(Apologies to W. S. Gilbert)

Stay tuned.

15 thoughts on “Team Kimberlin Post of the Day

  1. Anyone want to wager he emails them a different version of the complaint that what has actually been filed?

      • If I were the designer of the Kimberlin Unmasked website, and, I was aware that the email used to register that site had been subpoenaed, I would have abandoned that email address over a year ago. After a certain period of non-use, such accounts are automatically deleted. It may very well be the case that the email box in question no longer even exists.

    • I’d check the email address he submits to the court letter by letter to be sure.

      Then, I’d subpoena the e-mail provider to reveal the time of creation of the email account in question, and, the date of the last login. I wouldn’t put it past Brett Kimberlin to create the account to which he sent the summons.

  2. I like the suggestion that the defendants should ask for more time as the holidays fall right before their replies are due. If nothing else it would be very interesting to see if Hazel grants the defendants the same sort of leeway on filings that he has been routinely granting the plaintiff.

  3. What hath Hazel wrought?

    The new Kimberlin-Hazel legal regime is perfect for lawfare.

    Under these rules, you can pick an anonymous figure for a lawsuit that is made up. You can say that you have googled up a real person as the real identity of the anonymous figure. You don’t have to have actual evidence. Google will do. Then you pretend to serve them and then when that fails because you were pretending anyway, you email an address that you think might have been the real person’s address at some time.

    Then that real person is considered served.

    Now, if the real person responds, even to deny that they are the anonymous figure, they are caught up in the suit. And if they don’t, they may get stuck with a default judgment for a made up lawsuit.

    With the rules for service obviated, the person may never actually have known that they were being sued for something they never did because the tort never actually occurred and the person really isn’t the anonymous figure. But, without response, the risk of a default judgment is very high. The plaintiff wouldn’t even have to present any evidence, which is especially useful to the plaintiff that doesn’t have any evidence.

    Oh, and under Kimberlin-Hazel, it is also okay to forge a summons to a deep pocket corporation. And screw up that forged service up. And still get to sue them.

    This court will one day rue the precedents being set here.

    • I am not saying that Kimberlin and Hazel are colluding. I don’t thin key have to, fellow travellers travel together.

      But they could not have created a more pernicious legal atmosphere if they had been colluding.

    • A website designer uses an anonymous e-mail account to create a website. Over a year ago that account is subpoenaed. Surely, when the e-mail of the registrant was subpoenaed, the website designer reasonably ought to have known that the anonymity of that email was, or soon would be, compromised. Such a person preferring to conduct certain business anonymously would have abandoned such an account in favor of a newly created account. Surely, that designer would have used an eponymous mailbox to conduct their day to day business.

      What Judge Hazel has done is either order from the bench that Lynn Thomas and Peter Malone to read an abandoned email address. or, order from the bench that some website designer read that abandoned e-mail and act as a process server. He could just as easily ordered them to download copies of the suit from Pacer. While Judge Hazel might very well have the authority to issue such an order, surely, he has an obligation to serve them with such an order!

      • BSB it is worse than that. Lynn Thomas is not ordered to read an old email account. It is considered irrelevant whether it is her email or not, whether she reads it or not, and whether or not she is actually Kimberli Unmasked.

Leave a Reply