Motion_Sanctions_02144(AZ) - DieTrollDie Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a...
17
1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Steven James Goodhue (#029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd., Suite 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85260 Telephone: (480) 214-9500 Facsimile: (480) 214-9501 E-Mail: [email protected] Attorney for Plaintiff AF Holdings, L.L.C. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA AF HOLDINGS, L.L.C., a St. Kitts and Nevis limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. DAVID HARRIS, Defendant. CASE NO.: 2:12-CV-02144-PHX-GMS PLAINTIFF’S FORTHWITH MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS Plaintiff AF Holdings, L.L.C. (“Plaintiff”), through its undersigned counsel, hereby moves this Court for a forthwith Order imposing Sanctions of Defendant David Harris (“Defendant”), and as grounds therefore, states as follows: INTRODUCTION Throughout the course of the instant action, Defendant conduct has far exceeded the scope of the considerable leeway often afforded to pro se defendants. Plaintiff files the instant Motion for Sanctions in order to rectify Defendant’s unbridled and pervasive misconduct. Defendant established from the outset that he would not comply with his duties and obligations under the law. On November 20, 2012, the Court issued an Order setting a Rule 16 Case Case 2:12-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 01/04/13 Page 1 of 8
Transcript of Motion_Sanctions_02144(AZ) - DieTrollDie Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a...
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Steven James Goodhue (029288)
Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260 Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501 E-Mail sjgsjgoodlawcom Attorney for Plaintiff
AF Holdings LLC
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
PLAINTIFFrsquoS FORTHWITH
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID
HARRIS
Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC (ldquoPlaintiffrdquo) through its undersigned counsel hereby moves
this Court for a forthwith Order imposing Sanctions of Defendant David Harris (ldquoDefendantrdquo) and
as grounds therefore states as follows
INTRODUCTION
Throughout the course of the instant action Defendant conduct has far exceeded the scope of
the considerable leeway often afforded to pro se defendants Plaintiff files the instant Motion for
Sanctions in order to rectify Defendantrsquos unbridled and pervasive misconduct
Defendant established from the outset that he would not comply with his duties and
obligations under the law On November 20 2012 the Court issued an Order setting a Rule 16 Case
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 8
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Management Conference (ECF No 16) Pursuant to that order the parties were to meet and confer
on or before December 28 2012 to develop a Case Management Report and file their Joint Case
Management Report on or before January 11 2013 in anticipation of the Rule 16 Case Management
Conference on January 18 2013 On November 21 2012 Plaintiffrsquos counsel wrote to Defendant
and proposed that the parties schedule the Meet amp Confer conference the week of December 17
2012 and exchange Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosures on that date if not before (See ECF No 19
Exhibit A to Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause) On November 22 2012 Defendant sent
an email to Plaintiffrsquos counsel stating in part ldquoYour proposal is thoroughly rejectedrdquo (See ECF No
19 Exhibit B to Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause)
Following the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause (ECF 19) this Court
issued its Order of December 4 2012 (ECF No 24) directing the parties to ldquomeet in good faith and
hold a case management conference the week of December 17 2012 as required by Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 26(f)(1)rdquo The Court was clearly optimistic that Mr Harris would remedy his
conduct and comply with his legal obligations Mr Harris however yet again had other plans
Immediately following receipt of the Courtrsquos December 4 2012 Order on December 4 2012
Plaintiffrsquos counsel wrote to Defendant offering the afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning
of December 18 2012 for the meet and confer conference A true and correct copy of Plaintiffrsquos
counselrsquos December 4 2012 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit A (See Exhibit A)
By email of December 4 2012 Mr Harris initially demonstrated a willingness to meet at
200 pm on December 17 2012 at Plaintiffrsquos counselrsquos office for the meet and confer A true and
correct copy of Defendantrsquos December 4 2012 email is attached hereto as Exhibit B (See Exhibit B)
On December 14 2012 Plaintiffrsquos counsel provided Defendant with ldquoan outline of the Joint
Case Management Report and Proposed Case Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet
and confer conference on December 17 2012 at 200 pm at [Plaintiffrsquos counselrsquos] officerdquo A true
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 8
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and correct copy of Plaintiffrsquos December 14 2012 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit C (See Exhibit
C)
On December 15 2012 Defendant advised Plaintiffrsquos counsel by email that ldquoyour case
management report is absurdrdquo and that he would not be attending the scheduled meet and confer
stating in part that ldquountil the pending Motions before the court is (sic) ruled upon our meeting for
Monday December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponedrdquo A true and correct copy of Defendantrsquos
December 15 2012 email is attached hereto as Exhibit D (See Exhibit D)
On December 21 2012 Plaintiff filed its proposed Case Management Order (ECF 27)
without the cooperation or participation of Defendant in compiling the Case Management Report
On January 2 2013 Defendant sent the following email to Plaintiffrsquos counsel
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue ltsjgsjgoodlawcomgt
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this that
discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS32-2401(21)(b) unless you
can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona Department of
Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor the entity 6881
Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint against you for
unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you David
A true and correct copy of Defendantrsquos January 2 2013 email is attached hereto as Exhibit E
(See Exhibit E)
The multitude of abuses of the judicial system engaged in by Defendant is not new to this
Court as detailed in Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause Defendant has engaged in
reprehensible conduct throughout the pendency of this litigation (See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion
for Order to Show Cause) The undersigned truly hoped that the Courtrsquos directive regarding the
meet and confer would finally bring this action on track but it appears that Defendant regards the
Courtrsquos directives as mere suggestions and not as mandates to be heeded One does not need a law
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 8
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
degree to be able to show up to a certain place at a certain time Defendant knew the Court wanted
him to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos counsel Defendant knew when and where he had to be
present and Defendant even agreed at least initially to be present But just one day before the
scheduled meet and confer Defendant unjustifiably and unilaterally decided that the meet and confer
would be ldquoindefinitely postponedrdquo For the record Defendantrsquos dislike of Plaintiffrsquos case
management report is not an acceptable ground for refusing to meet and confer indeed the very
purpose of such reports is to allow both sides to offer their own input Plaintiffrsquos counsel was
prepared to meet with Defendant and cooperatively prepare the report but Defendant simply refused
This Court now faces the prospect of deciding whether its Orders are mandates or mere suggestions
if they are the former then Defendantrsquos willful disregard of the Courtrsquos Orders merit sanctions
LEGAL STANDARD
Federal courts have the inherent power to punish persons who abuse the judicial process
The inherent power of the court is an implied power squeezed from the need to make the courts
function Chambers v NASCO Inc 501 US 32 46 (1991) (finding that despite Rule 11 and 28
USC sect 1927 both being potentially applicable the court was not required to resort to using them
when the inherent power of court was best suited to the facts) Chambers 501 US 32 42 (1991)
(quoting NASCO Inc v Calcasieu Television amp Radio Inc 894 F2d 696 702 (5th Cir 1990)) A
district court may impose sanctions if it specifically finds bad faith or conduct tantamount to bad
faith Fink v Gomez 239 F3d 989 994 (9th Cir 2001) Sanctions are available for a variety of
types of willful actions including recklessness when combined with an additional factor such as
frivolousness harassment or an improper purpose Id In Fink the Ninth Circuit held that an
attorneys reckless misstatements of law and fact when coupled with an improper purpose are
sanctionable under a courts inherent power Id
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 4 of 8
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ARGUMENT
I DEFENDANT HAS ABUSED THE JUDICIAL PROCESS IN BAD FAITH
Throughout this action and especially in light his latest threats Defendant has acted and still
acts recklessly in misstating (and violating) the law in an attempt to harass Plaintiffrsquos attorney in the
hope that he will simply drop his claims against Defendant In the meantime his amateurish actions
are wasting everyonersquos time and resources This conduct is clearly sanctionable Id While Plaintiff
notes Defendantrsquos status as a pro se party Plaintiff also notes that Defendant cannot lean on that
supposed crutch to immunize him from his basic duties in this case Even though Defendant is pro
se he is clearly not illiterate and as such he is not excused from complying with court orders1 Nor
is Defendant a minor or incompetent and as such he is not excused from exercising basic decorum
when interacting with opposing counsel and the Court Defendantrsquos conduct amounts to a simple
unwillingness to exercise self-control Defendant knew he had to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel and he even agreed to a date and time for the meet and confer but once he read Plaintiffrsquos
case management statement draftmdashwhich of course is designed to advocate for Plaintiffrsquos
positionmdashDefendant decided he would have no part in complying with the Courtrsquos directive
Plaintiff does not feel it should be forced to bear the costs of Defendantrsquos lack of self control and
impulsivity but that is exactly what Plaintiff has had to do thus far having to draft a Motion for
Order to Show Cause to attempt to compel Defendant to meet and confer and then upon
Defendantrsquos second refusal to meet and confer and his most recent threat to draft the instant Motion
for Sanctions The alternative would be for Plaintiff to do nothing but this would not do justice to
anyone Plaintiff hopes to bring to the Courtrsquos attention that Defendantrsquos conduct merits a stern
reprimand from the Court not only for the benefit of the Court and of Plaintiff but that of Defendant
1 This Courtrsquos Order of November 21 2012 granted Defendantrsquos Motion for Reconsideration (ECF 18) giving
Defendant CMECF privileges In this Order the Court specifically stated in part ldquoDefendant is directed to familiarize
himself with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Arizona Local Ruleshelliprdquo
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 5 of 8
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
as well Defendant did himself a disservice by not participating in the meet and confer and not
having his views included in the completed document Though the Court may be inclined to show
Defendant leniency because of his pro se status leniency has already proved ineffective and in
doing so simply makes this action more costly and protracted for all involved for Plaintiff for the
Court and even for Defendant This includes Defendantrsquos ldquocolorfulrdquo filings and abusive language
(See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause) (describing the most egregious
examples of Defendantrsquos conduct) such conduct is demonstrative of a general disregard of the fact
that he is a litigant in Federal court2
Now instead of following the Courtrsquos orders and meeting and conferring with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel Defendant has continued his haphazard abuse of the judicial process by threatening
Plaintiffrsquos counsel with a bar complaint unless he can provide an Arizona Private Investigator license
for Peter Hansmeier (See Exhibit E) Defendant cites ARS sect 32-2401 (21)(b) in support of his
proposition The cited statute states that ldquoAiding or abetting a person who is not licensed pursuant to
this chapter in representing that person as a private investigator in this staterdquo constitutes
unprofessional conduct ARS sect 32-2401 (21) (b) Neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiffrsquos counsel has ever
represented formally or otherwise that Peter Hansmeier is a private investigator in the State of
Arizona It is clear that though Defendant is not a lawyer he had the ability to find this exact statute
and thus could have correctly interpreted it The plain language of the law clears up any supposed
issues It is simply the case that he chose not to do so because he does not take seriously his
responsibilities as a litigant in Federal court Rather Defendant seems to believe that he can conduct
himself in whatever way he pleases and do so without any repercussions Plaintiff submits that the
time has come for the Court to assert its inherent authority and bring Mr Harris in line before he
forces Plaintiff the Court and himself to incur further unnecessary delays and costs
2 Defendant also filed his Motion for Security of Non-Resident Plaintiff on November 30 2012 (ECF 23) which the
Court has yet to rule on but which is seen by Plaintiff as equally specious and harassing
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 6 of 8
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
II SANCTIONS REQUESTED
Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order requiring the following (1) that
Defendant comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
District of Arizona Local Rules (2) that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of
decorum incumbent upon litigants in Federal court (3) that the Court impose sanctions including
reasonable attorney fees for the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause and Plaintiffrsquos
Motion for Sanctions (see Affidavit of Steven James Goodhue attached hereto as Exhibit F regarding
the fees and costs spent on each effort) and (4) for such other relief as the Court deems just in the
premises
Dated this 4th
day of January 2013
Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
By _s Steven James Goodhue_________
Steven James Goodhue (029288) 9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
Attorney for Plaintiff
AF Holdings LLC
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 7 of 8
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I hereby certify that on January 4 2013 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the
Court for filing and uploading to the CM-ECF system which will send notifications of such filing to
all parties of record
A COPY of the foregoing was mailed (or
served via electronic notification if indicated by
an ldquordquo) on January 4 2013 to
Honorable G Murray Snow (snow_chambersazduscourtsgov)
US District Court
Sandra Day OrsquoConnor Courthouse Suite 324
401 West Washington Street SPC 82
Phoenix Arizona 85003-7550
David Harris (trollassassinscyber-wizardscom)
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
s Steven James Goodhue
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 8 of 8
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Management Conference (ECF No 16) Pursuant to that order the parties were to meet and confer
on or before December 28 2012 to develop a Case Management Report and file their Joint Case
Management Report on or before January 11 2013 in anticipation of the Rule 16 Case Management
Conference on January 18 2013 On November 21 2012 Plaintiffrsquos counsel wrote to Defendant
and proposed that the parties schedule the Meet amp Confer conference the week of December 17
2012 and exchange Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosures on that date if not before (See ECF No 19
Exhibit A to Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause) On November 22 2012 Defendant sent
an email to Plaintiffrsquos counsel stating in part ldquoYour proposal is thoroughly rejectedrdquo (See ECF No
19 Exhibit B to Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause)
Following the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause (ECF 19) this Court
issued its Order of December 4 2012 (ECF No 24) directing the parties to ldquomeet in good faith and
hold a case management conference the week of December 17 2012 as required by Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 26(f)(1)rdquo The Court was clearly optimistic that Mr Harris would remedy his
conduct and comply with his legal obligations Mr Harris however yet again had other plans
Immediately following receipt of the Courtrsquos December 4 2012 Order on December 4 2012
Plaintiffrsquos counsel wrote to Defendant offering the afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning
of December 18 2012 for the meet and confer conference A true and correct copy of Plaintiffrsquos
counselrsquos December 4 2012 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit A (See Exhibit A)
By email of December 4 2012 Mr Harris initially demonstrated a willingness to meet at
200 pm on December 17 2012 at Plaintiffrsquos counselrsquos office for the meet and confer A true and
correct copy of Defendantrsquos December 4 2012 email is attached hereto as Exhibit B (See Exhibit B)
On December 14 2012 Plaintiffrsquos counsel provided Defendant with ldquoan outline of the Joint
Case Management Report and Proposed Case Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet
and confer conference on December 17 2012 at 200 pm at [Plaintiffrsquos counselrsquos] officerdquo A true
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 8
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and correct copy of Plaintiffrsquos December 14 2012 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit C (See Exhibit
C)
On December 15 2012 Defendant advised Plaintiffrsquos counsel by email that ldquoyour case
management report is absurdrdquo and that he would not be attending the scheduled meet and confer
stating in part that ldquountil the pending Motions before the court is (sic) ruled upon our meeting for
Monday December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponedrdquo A true and correct copy of Defendantrsquos
December 15 2012 email is attached hereto as Exhibit D (See Exhibit D)
On December 21 2012 Plaintiff filed its proposed Case Management Order (ECF 27)
without the cooperation or participation of Defendant in compiling the Case Management Report
On January 2 2013 Defendant sent the following email to Plaintiffrsquos counsel
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue ltsjgsjgoodlawcomgt
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this that
discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS32-2401(21)(b) unless you
can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona Department of
Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor the entity 6881
Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint against you for
unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you David
A true and correct copy of Defendantrsquos January 2 2013 email is attached hereto as Exhibit E
(See Exhibit E)
The multitude of abuses of the judicial system engaged in by Defendant is not new to this
Court as detailed in Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause Defendant has engaged in
reprehensible conduct throughout the pendency of this litigation (See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion
for Order to Show Cause) The undersigned truly hoped that the Courtrsquos directive regarding the
meet and confer would finally bring this action on track but it appears that Defendant regards the
Courtrsquos directives as mere suggestions and not as mandates to be heeded One does not need a law
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 8
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
degree to be able to show up to a certain place at a certain time Defendant knew the Court wanted
him to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos counsel Defendant knew when and where he had to be
present and Defendant even agreed at least initially to be present But just one day before the
scheduled meet and confer Defendant unjustifiably and unilaterally decided that the meet and confer
would be ldquoindefinitely postponedrdquo For the record Defendantrsquos dislike of Plaintiffrsquos case
management report is not an acceptable ground for refusing to meet and confer indeed the very
purpose of such reports is to allow both sides to offer their own input Plaintiffrsquos counsel was
prepared to meet with Defendant and cooperatively prepare the report but Defendant simply refused
This Court now faces the prospect of deciding whether its Orders are mandates or mere suggestions
if they are the former then Defendantrsquos willful disregard of the Courtrsquos Orders merit sanctions
LEGAL STANDARD
Federal courts have the inherent power to punish persons who abuse the judicial process
The inherent power of the court is an implied power squeezed from the need to make the courts
function Chambers v NASCO Inc 501 US 32 46 (1991) (finding that despite Rule 11 and 28
USC sect 1927 both being potentially applicable the court was not required to resort to using them
when the inherent power of court was best suited to the facts) Chambers 501 US 32 42 (1991)
(quoting NASCO Inc v Calcasieu Television amp Radio Inc 894 F2d 696 702 (5th Cir 1990)) A
district court may impose sanctions if it specifically finds bad faith or conduct tantamount to bad
faith Fink v Gomez 239 F3d 989 994 (9th Cir 2001) Sanctions are available for a variety of
types of willful actions including recklessness when combined with an additional factor such as
frivolousness harassment or an improper purpose Id In Fink the Ninth Circuit held that an
attorneys reckless misstatements of law and fact when coupled with an improper purpose are
sanctionable under a courts inherent power Id
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 4 of 8
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ARGUMENT
I DEFENDANT HAS ABUSED THE JUDICIAL PROCESS IN BAD FAITH
Throughout this action and especially in light his latest threats Defendant has acted and still
acts recklessly in misstating (and violating) the law in an attempt to harass Plaintiffrsquos attorney in the
hope that he will simply drop his claims against Defendant In the meantime his amateurish actions
are wasting everyonersquos time and resources This conduct is clearly sanctionable Id While Plaintiff
notes Defendantrsquos status as a pro se party Plaintiff also notes that Defendant cannot lean on that
supposed crutch to immunize him from his basic duties in this case Even though Defendant is pro
se he is clearly not illiterate and as such he is not excused from complying with court orders1 Nor
is Defendant a minor or incompetent and as such he is not excused from exercising basic decorum
when interacting with opposing counsel and the Court Defendantrsquos conduct amounts to a simple
unwillingness to exercise self-control Defendant knew he had to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel and he even agreed to a date and time for the meet and confer but once he read Plaintiffrsquos
case management statement draftmdashwhich of course is designed to advocate for Plaintiffrsquos
positionmdashDefendant decided he would have no part in complying with the Courtrsquos directive
Plaintiff does not feel it should be forced to bear the costs of Defendantrsquos lack of self control and
impulsivity but that is exactly what Plaintiff has had to do thus far having to draft a Motion for
Order to Show Cause to attempt to compel Defendant to meet and confer and then upon
Defendantrsquos second refusal to meet and confer and his most recent threat to draft the instant Motion
for Sanctions The alternative would be for Plaintiff to do nothing but this would not do justice to
anyone Plaintiff hopes to bring to the Courtrsquos attention that Defendantrsquos conduct merits a stern
reprimand from the Court not only for the benefit of the Court and of Plaintiff but that of Defendant
1 This Courtrsquos Order of November 21 2012 granted Defendantrsquos Motion for Reconsideration (ECF 18) giving
Defendant CMECF privileges In this Order the Court specifically stated in part ldquoDefendant is directed to familiarize
himself with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Arizona Local Ruleshelliprdquo
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 5 of 8
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
as well Defendant did himself a disservice by not participating in the meet and confer and not
having his views included in the completed document Though the Court may be inclined to show
Defendant leniency because of his pro se status leniency has already proved ineffective and in
doing so simply makes this action more costly and protracted for all involved for Plaintiff for the
Court and even for Defendant This includes Defendantrsquos ldquocolorfulrdquo filings and abusive language
(See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause) (describing the most egregious
examples of Defendantrsquos conduct) such conduct is demonstrative of a general disregard of the fact
that he is a litigant in Federal court2
Now instead of following the Courtrsquos orders and meeting and conferring with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel Defendant has continued his haphazard abuse of the judicial process by threatening
Plaintiffrsquos counsel with a bar complaint unless he can provide an Arizona Private Investigator license
for Peter Hansmeier (See Exhibit E) Defendant cites ARS sect 32-2401 (21)(b) in support of his
proposition The cited statute states that ldquoAiding or abetting a person who is not licensed pursuant to
this chapter in representing that person as a private investigator in this staterdquo constitutes
unprofessional conduct ARS sect 32-2401 (21) (b) Neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiffrsquos counsel has ever
represented formally or otherwise that Peter Hansmeier is a private investigator in the State of
Arizona It is clear that though Defendant is not a lawyer he had the ability to find this exact statute
and thus could have correctly interpreted it The plain language of the law clears up any supposed
issues It is simply the case that he chose not to do so because he does not take seriously his
responsibilities as a litigant in Federal court Rather Defendant seems to believe that he can conduct
himself in whatever way he pleases and do so without any repercussions Plaintiff submits that the
time has come for the Court to assert its inherent authority and bring Mr Harris in line before he
forces Plaintiff the Court and himself to incur further unnecessary delays and costs
2 Defendant also filed his Motion for Security of Non-Resident Plaintiff on November 30 2012 (ECF 23) which the
Court has yet to rule on but which is seen by Plaintiff as equally specious and harassing
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 6 of 8
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
II SANCTIONS REQUESTED
Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order requiring the following (1) that
Defendant comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
District of Arizona Local Rules (2) that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of
decorum incumbent upon litigants in Federal court (3) that the Court impose sanctions including
reasonable attorney fees for the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause and Plaintiffrsquos
Motion for Sanctions (see Affidavit of Steven James Goodhue attached hereto as Exhibit F regarding
the fees and costs spent on each effort) and (4) for such other relief as the Court deems just in the
premises
Dated this 4th
day of January 2013
Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
By _s Steven James Goodhue_________
Steven James Goodhue (029288) 9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
Attorney for Plaintiff
AF Holdings LLC
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 7 of 8
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I hereby certify that on January 4 2013 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the
Court for filing and uploading to the CM-ECF system which will send notifications of such filing to
all parties of record
A COPY of the foregoing was mailed (or
served via electronic notification if indicated by
an ldquordquo) on January 4 2013 to
Honorable G Murray Snow (snow_chambersazduscourtsgov)
US District Court
Sandra Day OrsquoConnor Courthouse Suite 324
401 West Washington Street SPC 82
Phoenix Arizona 85003-7550
David Harris (trollassassinscyber-wizardscom)
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
s Steven James Goodhue
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 8 of 8
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and correct copy of Plaintiffrsquos December 14 2012 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit C (See Exhibit
C)
On December 15 2012 Defendant advised Plaintiffrsquos counsel by email that ldquoyour case
management report is absurdrdquo and that he would not be attending the scheduled meet and confer
stating in part that ldquountil the pending Motions before the court is (sic) ruled upon our meeting for
Monday December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponedrdquo A true and correct copy of Defendantrsquos
December 15 2012 email is attached hereto as Exhibit D (See Exhibit D)
On December 21 2012 Plaintiff filed its proposed Case Management Order (ECF 27)
without the cooperation or participation of Defendant in compiling the Case Management Report
On January 2 2013 Defendant sent the following email to Plaintiffrsquos counsel
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue ltsjgsjgoodlawcomgt
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this that
discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS32-2401(21)(b) unless you
can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona Department of
Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor the entity 6881
Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint against you for
unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you David
A true and correct copy of Defendantrsquos January 2 2013 email is attached hereto as Exhibit E
(See Exhibit E)
The multitude of abuses of the judicial system engaged in by Defendant is not new to this
Court as detailed in Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause Defendant has engaged in
reprehensible conduct throughout the pendency of this litigation (See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion
for Order to Show Cause) The undersigned truly hoped that the Courtrsquos directive regarding the
meet and confer would finally bring this action on track but it appears that Defendant regards the
Courtrsquos directives as mere suggestions and not as mandates to be heeded One does not need a law
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 8
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
degree to be able to show up to a certain place at a certain time Defendant knew the Court wanted
him to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos counsel Defendant knew when and where he had to be
present and Defendant even agreed at least initially to be present But just one day before the
scheduled meet and confer Defendant unjustifiably and unilaterally decided that the meet and confer
would be ldquoindefinitely postponedrdquo For the record Defendantrsquos dislike of Plaintiffrsquos case
management report is not an acceptable ground for refusing to meet and confer indeed the very
purpose of such reports is to allow both sides to offer their own input Plaintiffrsquos counsel was
prepared to meet with Defendant and cooperatively prepare the report but Defendant simply refused
This Court now faces the prospect of deciding whether its Orders are mandates or mere suggestions
if they are the former then Defendantrsquos willful disregard of the Courtrsquos Orders merit sanctions
LEGAL STANDARD
Federal courts have the inherent power to punish persons who abuse the judicial process
The inherent power of the court is an implied power squeezed from the need to make the courts
function Chambers v NASCO Inc 501 US 32 46 (1991) (finding that despite Rule 11 and 28
USC sect 1927 both being potentially applicable the court was not required to resort to using them
when the inherent power of court was best suited to the facts) Chambers 501 US 32 42 (1991)
(quoting NASCO Inc v Calcasieu Television amp Radio Inc 894 F2d 696 702 (5th Cir 1990)) A
district court may impose sanctions if it specifically finds bad faith or conduct tantamount to bad
faith Fink v Gomez 239 F3d 989 994 (9th Cir 2001) Sanctions are available for a variety of
types of willful actions including recklessness when combined with an additional factor such as
frivolousness harassment or an improper purpose Id In Fink the Ninth Circuit held that an
attorneys reckless misstatements of law and fact when coupled with an improper purpose are
sanctionable under a courts inherent power Id
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 4 of 8
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ARGUMENT
I DEFENDANT HAS ABUSED THE JUDICIAL PROCESS IN BAD FAITH
Throughout this action and especially in light his latest threats Defendant has acted and still
acts recklessly in misstating (and violating) the law in an attempt to harass Plaintiffrsquos attorney in the
hope that he will simply drop his claims against Defendant In the meantime his amateurish actions
are wasting everyonersquos time and resources This conduct is clearly sanctionable Id While Plaintiff
notes Defendantrsquos status as a pro se party Plaintiff also notes that Defendant cannot lean on that
supposed crutch to immunize him from his basic duties in this case Even though Defendant is pro
se he is clearly not illiterate and as such he is not excused from complying with court orders1 Nor
is Defendant a minor or incompetent and as such he is not excused from exercising basic decorum
when interacting with opposing counsel and the Court Defendantrsquos conduct amounts to a simple
unwillingness to exercise self-control Defendant knew he had to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel and he even agreed to a date and time for the meet and confer but once he read Plaintiffrsquos
case management statement draftmdashwhich of course is designed to advocate for Plaintiffrsquos
positionmdashDefendant decided he would have no part in complying with the Courtrsquos directive
Plaintiff does not feel it should be forced to bear the costs of Defendantrsquos lack of self control and
impulsivity but that is exactly what Plaintiff has had to do thus far having to draft a Motion for
Order to Show Cause to attempt to compel Defendant to meet and confer and then upon
Defendantrsquos second refusal to meet and confer and his most recent threat to draft the instant Motion
for Sanctions The alternative would be for Plaintiff to do nothing but this would not do justice to
anyone Plaintiff hopes to bring to the Courtrsquos attention that Defendantrsquos conduct merits a stern
reprimand from the Court not only for the benefit of the Court and of Plaintiff but that of Defendant
1 This Courtrsquos Order of November 21 2012 granted Defendantrsquos Motion for Reconsideration (ECF 18) giving
Defendant CMECF privileges In this Order the Court specifically stated in part ldquoDefendant is directed to familiarize
himself with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Arizona Local Ruleshelliprdquo
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 5 of 8
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
as well Defendant did himself a disservice by not participating in the meet and confer and not
having his views included in the completed document Though the Court may be inclined to show
Defendant leniency because of his pro se status leniency has already proved ineffective and in
doing so simply makes this action more costly and protracted for all involved for Plaintiff for the
Court and even for Defendant This includes Defendantrsquos ldquocolorfulrdquo filings and abusive language
(See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause) (describing the most egregious
examples of Defendantrsquos conduct) such conduct is demonstrative of a general disregard of the fact
that he is a litigant in Federal court2
Now instead of following the Courtrsquos orders and meeting and conferring with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel Defendant has continued his haphazard abuse of the judicial process by threatening
Plaintiffrsquos counsel with a bar complaint unless he can provide an Arizona Private Investigator license
for Peter Hansmeier (See Exhibit E) Defendant cites ARS sect 32-2401 (21)(b) in support of his
proposition The cited statute states that ldquoAiding or abetting a person who is not licensed pursuant to
this chapter in representing that person as a private investigator in this staterdquo constitutes
unprofessional conduct ARS sect 32-2401 (21) (b) Neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiffrsquos counsel has ever
represented formally or otherwise that Peter Hansmeier is a private investigator in the State of
Arizona It is clear that though Defendant is not a lawyer he had the ability to find this exact statute
and thus could have correctly interpreted it The plain language of the law clears up any supposed
issues It is simply the case that he chose not to do so because he does not take seriously his
responsibilities as a litigant in Federal court Rather Defendant seems to believe that he can conduct
himself in whatever way he pleases and do so without any repercussions Plaintiff submits that the
time has come for the Court to assert its inherent authority and bring Mr Harris in line before he
forces Plaintiff the Court and himself to incur further unnecessary delays and costs
2 Defendant also filed his Motion for Security of Non-Resident Plaintiff on November 30 2012 (ECF 23) which the
Court has yet to rule on but which is seen by Plaintiff as equally specious and harassing
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 6 of 8
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
II SANCTIONS REQUESTED
Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order requiring the following (1) that
Defendant comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
District of Arizona Local Rules (2) that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of
decorum incumbent upon litigants in Federal court (3) that the Court impose sanctions including
reasonable attorney fees for the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause and Plaintiffrsquos
Motion for Sanctions (see Affidavit of Steven James Goodhue attached hereto as Exhibit F regarding
the fees and costs spent on each effort) and (4) for such other relief as the Court deems just in the
premises
Dated this 4th
day of January 2013
Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
By _s Steven James Goodhue_________
Steven James Goodhue (029288) 9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
Attorney for Plaintiff
AF Holdings LLC
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 7 of 8
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I hereby certify that on January 4 2013 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the
Court for filing and uploading to the CM-ECF system which will send notifications of such filing to
all parties of record
A COPY of the foregoing was mailed (or
served via electronic notification if indicated by
an ldquordquo) on January 4 2013 to
Honorable G Murray Snow (snow_chambersazduscourtsgov)
US District Court
Sandra Day OrsquoConnor Courthouse Suite 324
401 West Washington Street SPC 82
Phoenix Arizona 85003-7550
David Harris (trollassassinscyber-wizardscom)
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
s Steven James Goodhue
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 8 of 8
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
degree to be able to show up to a certain place at a certain time Defendant knew the Court wanted
him to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos counsel Defendant knew when and where he had to be
present and Defendant even agreed at least initially to be present But just one day before the
scheduled meet and confer Defendant unjustifiably and unilaterally decided that the meet and confer
would be ldquoindefinitely postponedrdquo For the record Defendantrsquos dislike of Plaintiffrsquos case
management report is not an acceptable ground for refusing to meet and confer indeed the very
purpose of such reports is to allow both sides to offer their own input Plaintiffrsquos counsel was
prepared to meet with Defendant and cooperatively prepare the report but Defendant simply refused
This Court now faces the prospect of deciding whether its Orders are mandates or mere suggestions
if they are the former then Defendantrsquos willful disregard of the Courtrsquos Orders merit sanctions
LEGAL STANDARD
Federal courts have the inherent power to punish persons who abuse the judicial process
The inherent power of the court is an implied power squeezed from the need to make the courts
function Chambers v NASCO Inc 501 US 32 46 (1991) (finding that despite Rule 11 and 28
USC sect 1927 both being potentially applicable the court was not required to resort to using them
when the inherent power of court was best suited to the facts) Chambers 501 US 32 42 (1991)
(quoting NASCO Inc v Calcasieu Television amp Radio Inc 894 F2d 696 702 (5th Cir 1990)) A
district court may impose sanctions if it specifically finds bad faith or conduct tantamount to bad
faith Fink v Gomez 239 F3d 989 994 (9th Cir 2001) Sanctions are available for a variety of
types of willful actions including recklessness when combined with an additional factor such as
frivolousness harassment or an improper purpose Id In Fink the Ninth Circuit held that an
attorneys reckless misstatements of law and fact when coupled with an improper purpose are
sanctionable under a courts inherent power Id
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 4 of 8
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ARGUMENT
I DEFENDANT HAS ABUSED THE JUDICIAL PROCESS IN BAD FAITH
Throughout this action and especially in light his latest threats Defendant has acted and still
acts recklessly in misstating (and violating) the law in an attempt to harass Plaintiffrsquos attorney in the
hope that he will simply drop his claims against Defendant In the meantime his amateurish actions
are wasting everyonersquos time and resources This conduct is clearly sanctionable Id While Plaintiff
notes Defendantrsquos status as a pro se party Plaintiff also notes that Defendant cannot lean on that
supposed crutch to immunize him from his basic duties in this case Even though Defendant is pro
se he is clearly not illiterate and as such he is not excused from complying with court orders1 Nor
is Defendant a minor or incompetent and as such he is not excused from exercising basic decorum
when interacting with opposing counsel and the Court Defendantrsquos conduct amounts to a simple
unwillingness to exercise self-control Defendant knew he had to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel and he even agreed to a date and time for the meet and confer but once he read Plaintiffrsquos
case management statement draftmdashwhich of course is designed to advocate for Plaintiffrsquos
positionmdashDefendant decided he would have no part in complying with the Courtrsquos directive
Plaintiff does not feel it should be forced to bear the costs of Defendantrsquos lack of self control and
impulsivity but that is exactly what Plaintiff has had to do thus far having to draft a Motion for
Order to Show Cause to attempt to compel Defendant to meet and confer and then upon
Defendantrsquos second refusal to meet and confer and his most recent threat to draft the instant Motion
for Sanctions The alternative would be for Plaintiff to do nothing but this would not do justice to
anyone Plaintiff hopes to bring to the Courtrsquos attention that Defendantrsquos conduct merits a stern
reprimand from the Court not only for the benefit of the Court and of Plaintiff but that of Defendant
1 This Courtrsquos Order of November 21 2012 granted Defendantrsquos Motion for Reconsideration (ECF 18) giving
Defendant CMECF privileges In this Order the Court specifically stated in part ldquoDefendant is directed to familiarize
himself with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Arizona Local Ruleshelliprdquo
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 5 of 8
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
as well Defendant did himself a disservice by not participating in the meet and confer and not
having his views included in the completed document Though the Court may be inclined to show
Defendant leniency because of his pro se status leniency has already proved ineffective and in
doing so simply makes this action more costly and protracted for all involved for Plaintiff for the
Court and even for Defendant This includes Defendantrsquos ldquocolorfulrdquo filings and abusive language
(See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause) (describing the most egregious
examples of Defendantrsquos conduct) such conduct is demonstrative of a general disregard of the fact
that he is a litigant in Federal court2
Now instead of following the Courtrsquos orders and meeting and conferring with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel Defendant has continued his haphazard abuse of the judicial process by threatening
Plaintiffrsquos counsel with a bar complaint unless he can provide an Arizona Private Investigator license
for Peter Hansmeier (See Exhibit E) Defendant cites ARS sect 32-2401 (21)(b) in support of his
proposition The cited statute states that ldquoAiding or abetting a person who is not licensed pursuant to
this chapter in representing that person as a private investigator in this staterdquo constitutes
unprofessional conduct ARS sect 32-2401 (21) (b) Neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiffrsquos counsel has ever
represented formally or otherwise that Peter Hansmeier is a private investigator in the State of
Arizona It is clear that though Defendant is not a lawyer he had the ability to find this exact statute
and thus could have correctly interpreted it The plain language of the law clears up any supposed
issues It is simply the case that he chose not to do so because he does not take seriously his
responsibilities as a litigant in Federal court Rather Defendant seems to believe that he can conduct
himself in whatever way he pleases and do so without any repercussions Plaintiff submits that the
time has come for the Court to assert its inherent authority and bring Mr Harris in line before he
forces Plaintiff the Court and himself to incur further unnecessary delays and costs
2 Defendant also filed his Motion for Security of Non-Resident Plaintiff on November 30 2012 (ECF 23) which the
Court has yet to rule on but which is seen by Plaintiff as equally specious and harassing
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 6 of 8
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
II SANCTIONS REQUESTED
Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order requiring the following (1) that
Defendant comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
District of Arizona Local Rules (2) that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of
decorum incumbent upon litigants in Federal court (3) that the Court impose sanctions including
reasonable attorney fees for the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause and Plaintiffrsquos
Motion for Sanctions (see Affidavit of Steven James Goodhue attached hereto as Exhibit F regarding
the fees and costs spent on each effort) and (4) for such other relief as the Court deems just in the
premises
Dated this 4th
day of January 2013
Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
By _s Steven James Goodhue_________
Steven James Goodhue (029288) 9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
Attorney for Plaintiff
AF Holdings LLC
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 7 of 8
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I hereby certify that on January 4 2013 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the
Court for filing and uploading to the CM-ECF system which will send notifications of such filing to
all parties of record
A COPY of the foregoing was mailed (or
served via electronic notification if indicated by
an ldquordquo) on January 4 2013 to
Honorable G Murray Snow (snow_chambersazduscourtsgov)
US District Court
Sandra Day OrsquoConnor Courthouse Suite 324
401 West Washington Street SPC 82
Phoenix Arizona 85003-7550
David Harris (trollassassinscyber-wizardscom)
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
s Steven James Goodhue
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 8 of 8
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ARGUMENT
I DEFENDANT HAS ABUSED THE JUDICIAL PROCESS IN BAD FAITH
Throughout this action and especially in light his latest threats Defendant has acted and still
acts recklessly in misstating (and violating) the law in an attempt to harass Plaintiffrsquos attorney in the
hope that he will simply drop his claims against Defendant In the meantime his amateurish actions
are wasting everyonersquos time and resources This conduct is clearly sanctionable Id While Plaintiff
notes Defendantrsquos status as a pro se party Plaintiff also notes that Defendant cannot lean on that
supposed crutch to immunize him from his basic duties in this case Even though Defendant is pro
se he is clearly not illiterate and as such he is not excused from complying with court orders1 Nor
is Defendant a minor or incompetent and as such he is not excused from exercising basic decorum
when interacting with opposing counsel and the Court Defendantrsquos conduct amounts to a simple
unwillingness to exercise self-control Defendant knew he had to meet and confer with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel and he even agreed to a date and time for the meet and confer but once he read Plaintiffrsquos
case management statement draftmdashwhich of course is designed to advocate for Plaintiffrsquos
positionmdashDefendant decided he would have no part in complying with the Courtrsquos directive
Plaintiff does not feel it should be forced to bear the costs of Defendantrsquos lack of self control and
impulsivity but that is exactly what Plaintiff has had to do thus far having to draft a Motion for
Order to Show Cause to attempt to compel Defendant to meet and confer and then upon
Defendantrsquos second refusal to meet and confer and his most recent threat to draft the instant Motion
for Sanctions The alternative would be for Plaintiff to do nothing but this would not do justice to
anyone Plaintiff hopes to bring to the Courtrsquos attention that Defendantrsquos conduct merits a stern
reprimand from the Court not only for the benefit of the Court and of Plaintiff but that of Defendant
1 This Courtrsquos Order of November 21 2012 granted Defendantrsquos Motion for Reconsideration (ECF 18) giving
Defendant CMECF privileges In this Order the Court specifically stated in part ldquoDefendant is directed to familiarize
himself with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Arizona Local Ruleshelliprdquo
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 5 of 8
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
as well Defendant did himself a disservice by not participating in the meet and confer and not
having his views included in the completed document Though the Court may be inclined to show
Defendant leniency because of his pro se status leniency has already proved ineffective and in
doing so simply makes this action more costly and protracted for all involved for Plaintiff for the
Court and even for Defendant This includes Defendantrsquos ldquocolorfulrdquo filings and abusive language
(See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause) (describing the most egregious
examples of Defendantrsquos conduct) such conduct is demonstrative of a general disregard of the fact
that he is a litigant in Federal court2
Now instead of following the Courtrsquos orders and meeting and conferring with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel Defendant has continued his haphazard abuse of the judicial process by threatening
Plaintiffrsquos counsel with a bar complaint unless he can provide an Arizona Private Investigator license
for Peter Hansmeier (See Exhibit E) Defendant cites ARS sect 32-2401 (21)(b) in support of his
proposition The cited statute states that ldquoAiding or abetting a person who is not licensed pursuant to
this chapter in representing that person as a private investigator in this staterdquo constitutes
unprofessional conduct ARS sect 32-2401 (21) (b) Neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiffrsquos counsel has ever
represented formally or otherwise that Peter Hansmeier is a private investigator in the State of
Arizona It is clear that though Defendant is not a lawyer he had the ability to find this exact statute
and thus could have correctly interpreted it The plain language of the law clears up any supposed
issues It is simply the case that he chose not to do so because he does not take seriously his
responsibilities as a litigant in Federal court Rather Defendant seems to believe that he can conduct
himself in whatever way he pleases and do so without any repercussions Plaintiff submits that the
time has come for the Court to assert its inherent authority and bring Mr Harris in line before he
forces Plaintiff the Court and himself to incur further unnecessary delays and costs
2 Defendant also filed his Motion for Security of Non-Resident Plaintiff on November 30 2012 (ECF 23) which the
Court has yet to rule on but which is seen by Plaintiff as equally specious and harassing
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 6 of 8
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
II SANCTIONS REQUESTED
Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order requiring the following (1) that
Defendant comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
District of Arizona Local Rules (2) that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of
decorum incumbent upon litigants in Federal court (3) that the Court impose sanctions including
reasonable attorney fees for the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause and Plaintiffrsquos
Motion for Sanctions (see Affidavit of Steven James Goodhue attached hereto as Exhibit F regarding
the fees and costs spent on each effort) and (4) for such other relief as the Court deems just in the
premises
Dated this 4th
day of January 2013
Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
By _s Steven James Goodhue_________
Steven James Goodhue (029288) 9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
Attorney for Plaintiff
AF Holdings LLC
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 7 of 8
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I hereby certify that on January 4 2013 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the
Court for filing and uploading to the CM-ECF system which will send notifications of such filing to
all parties of record
A COPY of the foregoing was mailed (or
served via electronic notification if indicated by
an ldquordquo) on January 4 2013 to
Honorable G Murray Snow (snow_chambersazduscourtsgov)
US District Court
Sandra Day OrsquoConnor Courthouse Suite 324
401 West Washington Street SPC 82
Phoenix Arizona 85003-7550
David Harris (trollassassinscyber-wizardscom)
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
s Steven James Goodhue
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 8 of 8
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
as well Defendant did himself a disservice by not participating in the meet and confer and not
having his views included in the completed document Though the Court may be inclined to show
Defendant leniency because of his pro se status leniency has already proved ineffective and in
doing so simply makes this action more costly and protracted for all involved for Plaintiff for the
Court and even for Defendant This includes Defendantrsquos ldquocolorfulrdquo filings and abusive language
(See generally Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause) (describing the most egregious
examples of Defendantrsquos conduct) such conduct is demonstrative of a general disregard of the fact
that he is a litigant in Federal court2
Now instead of following the Courtrsquos orders and meeting and conferring with Plaintiffrsquos
counsel Defendant has continued his haphazard abuse of the judicial process by threatening
Plaintiffrsquos counsel with a bar complaint unless he can provide an Arizona Private Investigator license
for Peter Hansmeier (See Exhibit E) Defendant cites ARS sect 32-2401 (21)(b) in support of his
proposition The cited statute states that ldquoAiding or abetting a person who is not licensed pursuant to
this chapter in representing that person as a private investigator in this staterdquo constitutes
unprofessional conduct ARS sect 32-2401 (21) (b) Neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiffrsquos counsel has ever
represented formally or otherwise that Peter Hansmeier is a private investigator in the State of
Arizona It is clear that though Defendant is not a lawyer he had the ability to find this exact statute
and thus could have correctly interpreted it The plain language of the law clears up any supposed
issues It is simply the case that he chose not to do so because he does not take seriously his
responsibilities as a litigant in Federal court Rather Defendant seems to believe that he can conduct
himself in whatever way he pleases and do so without any repercussions Plaintiff submits that the
time has come for the Court to assert its inherent authority and bring Mr Harris in line before he
forces Plaintiff the Court and himself to incur further unnecessary delays and costs
2 Defendant also filed his Motion for Security of Non-Resident Plaintiff on November 30 2012 (ECF 23) which the
Court has yet to rule on but which is seen by Plaintiff as equally specious and harassing
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 6 of 8
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
II SANCTIONS REQUESTED
Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order requiring the following (1) that
Defendant comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
District of Arizona Local Rules (2) that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of
decorum incumbent upon litigants in Federal court (3) that the Court impose sanctions including
reasonable attorney fees for the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause and Plaintiffrsquos
Motion for Sanctions (see Affidavit of Steven James Goodhue attached hereto as Exhibit F regarding
the fees and costs spent on each effort) and (4) for such other relief as the Court deems just in the
premises
Dated this 4th
day of January 2013
Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
By _s Steven James Goodhue_________
Steven James Goodhue (029288) 9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
Attorney for Plaintiff
AF Holdings LLC
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 7 of 8
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I hereby certify that on January 4 2013 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the
Court for filing and uploading to the CM-ECF system which will send notifications of such filing to
all parties of record
A COPY of the foregoing was mailed (or
served via electronic notification if indicated by
an ldquordquo) on January 4 2013 to
Honorable G Murray Snow (snow_chambersazduscourtsgov)
US District Court
Sandra Day OrsquoConnor Courthouse Suite 324
401 West Washington Street SPC 82
Phoenix Arizona 85003-7550
David Harris (trollassassinscyber-wizardscom)
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
s Steven James Goodhue
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 8 of 8
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
II SANCTIONS REQUESTED
Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order requiring the following (1) that
Defendant comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
District of Arizona Local Rules (2) that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of
decorum incumbent upon litigants in Federal court (3) that the Court impose sanctions including
reasonable attorney fees for the filing of Plaintiffrsquos Motion for Order to Show Cause and Plaintiffrsquos
Motion for Sanctions (see Affidavit of Steven James Goodhue attached hereto as Exhibit F regarding
the fees and costs spent on each effort) and (4) for such other relief as the Court deems just in the
premises
Dated this 4th
day of January 2013
Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
By _s Steven James Goodhue_________
Steven James Goodhue (029288) 9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
Attorney for Plaintiff
AF Holdings LLC
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 7 of 8
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I hereby certify that on January 4 2013 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the
Court for filing and uploading to the CM-ECF system which will send notifications of such filing to
all parties of record
A COPY of the foregoing was mailed (or
served via electronic notification if indicated by
an ldquordquo) on January 4 2013 to
Honorable G Murray Snow (snow_chambersazduscourtsgov)
US District Court
Sandra Day OrsquoConnor Courthouse Suite 324
401 West Washington Street SPC 82
Phoenix Arizona 85003-7550
David Harris (trollassassinscyber-wizardscom)
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
s Steven James Goodhue
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 8 of 8
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I hereby certify that on January 4 2013 I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the
Court for filing and uploading to the CM-ECF system which will send notifications of such filing to
all parties of record
A COPY of the foregoing was mailed (or
served via electronic notification if indicated by
an ldquordquo) on January 4 2013 to
Honorable G Murray Snow (snow_chambersazduscourtsgov)
US District Court
Sandra Day OrsquoConnor Courthouse Suite 324
401 West Washington Street SPC 82
Phoenix Arizona 85003-7550
David Harris (trollassassinscyber-wizardscom)
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
s Steven James Goodhue
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29 Filed 010413 Page 8 of 8
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 4 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Pursuant to the Courtrsquos Order of December 4 2012 I am able to meet with you the
afternoon of December 17 2012 or the morning of December 18 2012 at my offices located at
9375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale Arizona 85260 Please confirm your attendance
Thank you for your attention to this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-1 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject RE AF Holdings LLC v David Harris Case No
212-CV-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Tue December 04 2012 416 pm
To sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue I will be at your office Monday December 17 at 200pm I have one non-
negotiable demand that Duffy attend He is the one I believe litigating this claim and he is the
one that originally offered a reasonable settlement in good faith for just $340000 he would so
generously let me off the hook of a $10000000 $1140 for a total of $8772 Let me know
right a way if Duffy acts shy so I have time to get leave to subpoena him David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-2 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
Colorado Office 1101 South Downing Street Denver Colorado 80210 3038888809
Steven James Goodhue 9375 East Shea Blvd
Attorney at Law Suite 100 Admitted in CO CA amp AZ Scottsdale Arizona 85260
4802149500 sjgsjgoodlawcom
December 14 2012
VIA EMAIL ONLY trollassassinscyber-wizardscom
David Harris
4632 East Caballero Street 1
Mesa Arizona 85205
Re AF Holdings LLC v David Harris
Case No 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
Dear Mr Harris
Enclosed please find an outline of the Joint Case Management Report and Proposed Case
Management Order in anticipation of our 26(f) meet and confer conference on December 17
2012 at 200 pm at my office
Thank you for your assistance in this matter
Very truly yours
Steven James Goodhue
SJG
Enclosure
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-3 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 12-02144
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Sat December 15 2012 1242 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
Sir with all due respect your case management report is absurd Do you really think that
I am going to sign a court document stating facts that are in dispute I am not admitting that you
have subject matter jurisdiction when I am disputing that very fact Nor am I going to admit that
I infringed on your clients copyright for two reasons 1 I did not 2 Your client does not own
the copyright at the alleged time of infringement You are hoping to acquire through discovery
the means to legitimize this lawsuit well I am not going to contribute to your fishing trip
Until the Pending Motions before the Court is ruled upon our meeting for Monday
December 17 2012 is indefinitely postponed Thank you David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-4 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
-------- Original Message --------
Subject 212-cv-02144-GMS
From trollassassinscyber-wizardcom
Date Wed January 02 2013 346 pm
To Mr Goodhue sjgsjgoodlawcom
Mr Goodhue
The Arizona State Bar Association requires that before filing a complaint for disciplinary action
against a lawyer for unprofessional conduct the I discuss the problem with him Consider this
that discussion You are guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by ARS 32-2401(21)(b)
unless you can supply proper credentials Please return by January 7 2013 State of Arizona
Department of Public Safety private investigator license information for Peter Hansmeier andor
the entity 6881 Forensics If you fail to comply with this request then I will file a complaint
against you for unprofessional conduct with the Arizona State Bar Association Thank you
David
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-5 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
11
1 II Steven James Goodhue (029288) Law Offices of Steven James Goodhue
2 119375 East Shea Blvd Suite 100 Scottsdale AZ 85260
3 II Telephone (480) 214-9500 Facsimile (480) 214-9501
4 II E-Mail sjg~sjgoodlawcom
Attorneyfor Plaintiff 511AF Holdings LLC
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 II AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis limited liability company
Plaintiff 12 II V
13 II DAVID HARRIS
14 II Defendant
15 I~I------------------------------~
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PIIX-GMS
AFFIVDAVIT OF STEVEN JAMES GOODHUE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT DAVID HARRIS
16 II I Steven James Goodhue being duly sworn states and avers as follows
17 1 I am the attorney of record for the Plaintiff AF Holdings LLC in the above
18 II captioned matter
19 2 I am a licensed attorney and in good standing in the states of Colorado California and
20 II Arizona and have been practicing law for over 30 years I am also admitted to practice before and
21 II in good standing with the US District Court District ofColorado the US District Court Southern
22 1 District of California the US District Court District of Arizona the US Court of Appeals9tb
23 II Circuit the US Court ofAppeals-10th Circuit and the US Supreme Court
3 My hourly rate is $45000 per hour
1
24
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 3
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
4 Based on my familiarity with the legal profession and with what attorneys with my
2 II experience and background charge for similar services in similar cases my hourly rate is within the
3 II customarily charged fees in this jurisdiction and is reasonable
4
I
5 This case involves a claim for copyright infringement under the United States
5 II Copyright Act with related clams for contributory infringement civil conspiracy and negligence
6 II claims under the common law to combat the willful and intentional infringement of its creative
7 II works Plaintiff alleges that Defendant knowingly and illegally reproduced and distributed
8 II Plaintiffs copyrighted property
9 6 In the course of prosecuting this matter Plaintiff has had to respond to various acts of
10 II misconduct by Defendant which have required the filing of Plaintiffs Motion for Order to Show Cause
LI II (ECF 19) and the instant Motion for Sanctions
7 In preparing the Motion for Order to Show Cause and the Reply thereto Plaintiffs 12
13 counsel expended 78 hours In preparing the Motion for Sanctions Plaintiffs counsel expended 54
14 hours Based on the hourly rate Plaintiffs counsels attorneys fees for the preparation of these
15 II pleadings totaled $594000
8 I make this Affidavit in support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions against Defendant 16
David Harris 17
18 FURTHER THEAFFIANTSAYETHNAUGHT
19 11 Dated this 4th day ofJanuary 2013
20
21 ~ltgt=-
Steven James Goodhue
22
23
24
2
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 2 of 3
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
1 II STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss
2 II CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER )
3 II Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11day of Januarymiddot 2013
4 bull IhfYM(~~
5 II Notary Public
6 II My Commission Expires CS--17 - I~
7
8
9
lO
11
l2
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(Seal or Stamp)
My Commission EXI)iros May 17 2015
3
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-6 Filed 010413 Page 3 of 3
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AF HOLDINGS LLC a St Kitts and Nevis
limited liability company
Plaintiff
v
DAVID HARRIS
Defendant
CASE NO 212-CV-02144-PHX-GMS
ORDER RE PLAINTIFFrsquoS
FORTHWITH MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT
DAVID HARRIS
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffrsquos Forthwith Motion for Sanctions Against
Defendant Harris and the Court having reviewed Plaintiffrsquos Motion the relevant case law the file
and being fully advised in the premises
ORDERS Plaintiff Motion for Sanctions is hereby GRANTED
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant is to comply with the Orders of this Court the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and the District of Arizona Local Rules of this Court or face contempt
FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant conduct himself consistent with the rules of decorum
incumbent upon litigants in Federal court or face contempt
FUTHER ORDERS that Plaintiff is awarded its attorneyrsquos fees and costs incurred in the
filing of the Motion for Order to Show Cause and in the Motion for Sanctions as set forth in its
Affidavit of Attorneyrsquos fees set forth in Exhibit F
Case 212-cv-02144-GMS Document 29-7 Filed 010413 Page 1 of 1
