Prenda Hit With $12,000 In Sanctions Over Its Bogus Defamation Suit

from the Assclown-Law-racks-up-another-debit dept

The spectacular Prenda flameout continues. As was reported here back in January, US District Judge John Darrah approved Paul Godfread and Alan Cooper's request for sanctions at the tail end of Prenda's disastrous defamation suit (one John Steele himself did plenty to undermine). Now, we have a dollar amount. (via Ars Technica)
Today, Judge Darrah in the Northern District of Illinois granted yet another sanctions award against copyright troll Prenda Law. Paul Godfread and Alan Cooper have been awarded $11,758.20 as reimbursement for a portion of the fees they have spent on attorneys in defending themselves against Prenda’s defamation lawsuit.

The Court awarded the sanctions under both Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 as well as its inherent power to sanction provided in 28 U.S.C. § 1927. In the Court’s own words, the sanctions award was “[b]ased on Prenda’s misrepresentations in this Court” and the Defendants’ incurred fees were “occasioned by the misconduct of Prenda Law and Paul A. Duffy in this Court.”
This will be added to the half-million in (mostly uncollected) sanctions levied against Prenda since the beginning of last year. Prenda tried to argue that the hourly fee requested was ridiculously high.
According to the American Intellectual Property Law Association’s 2013 Report of the Economic Survey, intellectual property attorneys based in Chicago and Boston within the first quartile bill $400 per hour, in line with the amount billed by Defendants’ counsel, who are based in Chicago and Boston. (Dkt. No. 61, Ex. B.) Yet, Prenda argues that this rate is “exorbitant” because Defendants’ attorney Erin Russell is not registered before the United States Patent and Trademark Office and, therefore, not an intellectual property attorney.
"Apropos of what," Judge Darrah doesn't even bother asking.
Prenda cites no law supporting this contention, and its claim of exorbitant rates fails.
Prenda also argued that some of the fees incurred were "self-inflicted" and not the direct result of its bogus lawsuit/endless dicking around. Darrah dismantles this argument as well.
The basis of Prenda’s mitigation argument is that Defendants chose not to trust Prenda to withdraw its motion to remand. Defendants’ failure to trust Prenda was not unreasonable, given Prenda’s vigorous defense of its motion to remand on the same day it filed its motion to withdraw the motion. In any event, Defendants’ response to Prenda’s motion to remand was sufficiently quick and efficient. Not only did Defendants file their response within six days, they filed it on the same day that Prenda presented its motion to withdraw. Prenda’s opposition with respect to Defendants’ fees being self-inflicted or avoidable is denied.
Prenda did manage to come out of this in slightly better shape than it could have. Darrah only awarded the attorney's fees racked up in his court, not including anything that occurred in a separate court in 2013. That decision cut the awarded amount roughly in half.

This appears to be the final moments for Prenda Law, a sordid episode of legal abuse that is ending with lots of (gavel) banging and (Prenda partner) whimpering.

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Donnicton, Jun 17th, 2014 @ 1:17am

    Hell with Game of Thrones, I'd subscribe to HBO just to watch this drama series.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    Anon E. Mous (profile), Jun 17th, 2014 @ 1:42am

    I doubt anyone here is surprised that someone associated with Prenda Law has been found of mis-leading the court in a case.

    This is just another example at how far Duffy, Steele and Hansmeier will go to further their litigation.

    Duffy intentionally lied to the Judge about what the other Judge who had this case before hand had ruled. This Judge caught Duffy in that intentional lie and thus he gets to hit with a $12k fine to pay.

    Duffy is lucky the Judge didn't refer him to the Illinois state bar for this. Duffy has an oath as a Lawyer and an officer of the court to act with regard to the rules and conduct governing him as such.

    Much like in Judge Wrights ruling and other Judges ruling's have show is that Steele, Hansmeier and Duffy will go to know end to perpetuate fraud upon the court and will to continue to abuse the court system to get a win for their side.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Michael, Jun 17th, 2014 @ 4:09am

    Defendants’ attorney Erin Russell is not registered before the United States Patent and Trademark Office and, therefore, not an intellectual property attorney

    and yet, mysteriously, kicked Prenda's a** in an IP case. Interesting.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 17th, 2014 @ 4:20am

    Idols of copyright proponents everywhere, the heroes of average_joe and Whatever who can do no wrong!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 17th, 2014 @ 5:00am

    "Prenda argues that this rate is exorbitant"

    Well - they should know.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 17th, 2014 @ 5:17am

    Avoidable

    "You see, yer honor, the defendants expenses were all avoidable. They coulda just paid us off in the beginning and avoided this whole trial. It's not our fault they didn't!"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 17th, 2014 @ 6:50am

    So where are all the IP defenders on this blog defending Prenda insisting they will win despite every loss they encounter? What do they all have to say now? Can they possibly come up with the honesty to admit they were wrong or will they forever be regarded as the dishonest shills that they are??!!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Michael, Jun 17th, 2014 @ 7:11am

    Re:

    “[b]ased on Prenda’s misrepresentations in this Court” and the Defendants’ incurred fees were “occasioned by the misconduct of Prenda Law and Paul A. Duffy in this Court.”

    This is total BS. The judge is clearly a Google shill and has issued this ruling just to support a company that is funneling money his way. There has not been any misconduct by Prenda or Paul Duffy.

    In fact, the misconduct has been by Paul Godfread who is misleading the court in this travesty of justice and enabling copyright infringement on a scale never seen before.

    Not to mention, Alan Cooper, who created all of this in a brilliantly executed plan to embarrass Prenda and get free porn.

    The unfortunate situation this has put Paul Duffy in personally is horrible and we should all stand up in support of him.



    how was that?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    icon
    DOlz (profile), Jun 17th, 2014 @ 7:12am

    Not good enough

    While it’s great to see the courts rapping Prenda’s knuckles, that’s all it has been so far. Until these miscreants start coughing up cash and/or doing jail time, they’re still winning and laughing at us and the legal system.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Michael, Jun 17th, 2014 @ 7:34am

    Re: Re:

    Oh, and I can add that the reporting on this site totally sucks. The headline is completely misleading:

    Prenda Hit With $12,000 In Sanctions Over Its Bogus Defamation Suit

    It is not $12,000. It is $11,758.20. That is $241.80 off - more than 2% for those of you counting. I thought Mikey was into statistics. Really Mikey? You are going to throw out misleading numbers and then expect people to believe you when you are saying Hollywood's numbers are misleading?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), Jun 17th, 2014 @ 11:57am

    Re: Not good enough

    Indeed, it doesn't matter how much they're ordered to pay out, unless there's some real punishment for failing to do so, the fine amount is meaningless. Then you've got lying to the courts, multiple times, and yet not a single perjury charge in sight...

    Even when they get 'punished', copyright trolls still make out like kings, because the courts aren't willing to actually do anything concrete about them, just a slap on the wrist here, and a 'Don't let me catch you doing that again' there.

    And the Bar... well, they might as well not exists, given being a lawyer is apparently a permanent job, where once you're in, you can do whatever you want with impunity.

    I'd say the only consolation is the potential that the IRS is sniffing about Prenda, which if true, it may take a few years to pan out, but when it does... oh the carnage should be glorious.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), Jun 17th, 2014 @ 3:20pm

    Heh... so how did attacking the interwebs work out for y'all Pretenda?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 18th, 2014 @ 7:56pm

    Re:

    Duffy is desperate and doesn't have the cash. His house has been in foreclosure and his wife is out partying like all is going okay.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 18th, 2014 @ 7:59pm

    Re: Re:

    Shut up. You must be Shari's "friend"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 2nd, 2014 @ 1:17pm

    Re: Re: (michael)

    Michael, you must be Shari's business partner. Just wait til she screws you over.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
Advertisement
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Chat
Techdirt Reading List
Advertisement
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Support Techdirt - Get Great Stuff!

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.