Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys and their personalities.

strike-3-holdings-anonymous-settlement

Why knowing which Strike 3 Holdings attorneys are filing the lawsuit against you is relevant to your case.

Strike 3 Holdings attorneys work together as cogs in a wheel to run what our Cashman Law Firm LLC calls a “quasi-legitimate settlement extortion scheme.” As far as the public is concerned, each Strike 3 Holdings attorney appears to work independently and appears to have autonomy to make decisions on how to run the copyright infringement cases federal court cases. However, based on my observations, there are attorneys who have authority to direct their own cases, and there are attorneys who appear to read scripts to accused defendants and file boilerplate documents in the federal courts when moving their cookie-cutter lawsuits against hundreds of John Doe defendants through the federal court system.

strike-3-holdings-attorneys-personalities Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys Personality
3dman_eu / Pixabay

Strike 3 Holdings attorneys come in two flavors.

Strike 3 Holdings attorneys appear to come in two flavors:

“Bosses”: There are Strike 3 Holdings attorney “bosses” (which are attorneys who have been running the settlement extortion scheme and the lawsuits for years now).

“Underlings”: There are Strike 3 Holdings attorneys which are “underlings” (which are newer attorneys who have been hired by Strike 3 to be a “warm body” in a federal court.

While I understand that in all cases, the more experienced Strike 3 attorneys appear to control the lawsuits, albeit “in the shadows.” I wrote about this in the article, “Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys in Miami-Dade County, Florida Have a ‘Behind the Scenes Shadow'” article in January, 2020).

The former “boss” of all of the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys was Lincoln Bandlow.

For many years, Lincoln Bandlow (formerly of Fox Rothschild LLP) ran each and every Strike 3 Holdings, LLC lawsuit filed across the US. I understand that his network used to be separated into “teams” of attorneys, although which Strike 3 Holdings attorneys were on what “team” remains unknown to me.

My best guess is that each team was presumably separated by region — each geographic area of the US had a different “team”; although I would not be shocked if the “teams” were separated by hierarchy (like a pyramid). This way, those with decision-making power would be on one team, and those “underlings” who are merely reading scripts and following orders are in another team.

Why I think Strike 3 Holdings LLC now has multiple bosses.

Interestingly enough, as of May, 2019, I no longer think that there is one “boss” or “kingpin” running all of the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC lawsuits, but TWO. In May, 2019, I started to notice that the wrong Strike 3 Holdings attorneys were listed on the various court filings across the US. One of their Strike 3 Holdings attorneys would be listed as the attorney-of-record, but another attorney would be the one handling the case.

What was more interesting is that while Lincoln Bandlow [originally] was running everything, I noticed that a growing select number of attorneys [like Jacqueline James (Jackie James)] exerted authority over their cases in the form of making on-the-spot decisions where in the past, they would need to always “consult their client” and get back to me (meaning, they would check with Lincoln to get his authority or permission to agree to something I was pushing for a particular client of mine).

I noticed the same thing with John Atkin, who first worked for Fox Rothschild LLP (apparently as an “underling”) handling their New Jersey cases. But then, John Atkin left Fox Rothschild LLP and formed his own law firm, “The Atkin Firm, LLC.” That same day, based on my interactions with him, he began to manage his cases as if he were a “boss,” making decisions on-the-spot and deciding the direction of his own cases.

I discussed this shake-up of Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in an article that even one year later is still an interesting read because the players are still the same people.

I created this page so that you can look up the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys who sued you so that you can know their personality.

For now, I am creating this page with the intention of identifying which Strike 3 Holdings attorneys are operating in which states, so that [over time; I will edit this page again with updates] you will be able to come back here and look up the attorney who sued you in your home state’s federal court.

A Quick Note About Strike 3 Holdings State-Based Lawsuits (and why I think they will be filing in Arizona next).

NOTEWORTHY SIDE COMMENT: Since 2019, Strike 3 Holdings attorneys have also been suing defendants in state and county courts, such as the Miami-Dade County, Florida court. These lawsuits are NOT copyright infringement lawsuits, and no claims are asserted against each John Doe Defendant implicated in their lawsuits. However, because the threat is that “we will identify the accused infringer and sue him or her in the federal court in which he lives,” (my quote referring to them, not their actual words), these state-based Bill of Discovery lawsuits are concerning because they expose each possible defendant to Strike 3 Holdings and their forced-settlement extortion scheme.

This is not the first time a copyright troll such as Strike 3 Holdings, LLC tried this tactic of suing defendants in state courts under that state’s Bill of Discovery laws. Other former prolific copyright trolls have sued defendants in Maricopa County, Arizona as well as Miami-Dade, FL. [Arizona is where Strike 3 will probably be going next once they exhaust the “Miami-Dade Bill of Discovery” lawsuit campaign they have been running since late 2019].

List of Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys by State

Here is a list of Strike 3 Holdings attorneys for each state in which they are currently suing defendants:

Miami-Dade County, Florida
There are two known Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in Miami-Dade, Florida. Rachel Walker, and Tyler Mamone. In January, 2020, I wrote that Rachel Walker and Tyler Mamone were not the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys with apparent authority to decide the fate of each accused John Doe defendant, but rather, Lincoln Bandlow was the one apparently running the cases behind the scenes.

More recently, it appears to me as if these Strike 3 Holdings attorneys *are* running the Miami-Dade, Florida cases, but where a defendant lives in a different location, e.g., they live in New York or Connecticut where Jackie James is “in charge” of that region, the case is handed off to Jackie James, and so on.

For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the currently open Miami-Dade County Strike 3 Holdings cases:

Local Case Numbers (open cases): 2020-016660-CC-05, 2020-016669-CC-05, 2020-016577-CC-05, 2020-014518-CC-05, 2020-014520-CC-05, 2020-014481-CC-05, 2020-012478-CC-05, 2020-011743-CC-05, 2020-011744-CC-05, 2020-011499-CC-05, 2020-009492-CC-05, 2020-009491-CC-05, 2020-009493-CC-05, 2020-005388-CC-05, 2020-003890-CC-05, 2020-003891-CC-05, 2020-003737-CC-05, 2020-002968-CC-05, 2020-002019-CC-05, 2020-002021-CC-05, 2020-001616-CC-05, 2019-032919-CC-05, 2019-032825-CC-05, 2019-026368-CC-05, 2019-024647-CC-05.

California
California Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Lincoln Bandlow of Bandlow Law.

As you have read above, Lincoln Bandlow used to work for Fox Rothschild, LLP, where he ran all of the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys and their cases across the US. But since the shake-up May, 2019, he left Fox Rothschild, LLP and started his own law firm.

I still think that Lincoln is behind the scenes running each of the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases filed across the US, but I no longer think he has sole authority and decision-making power. I believe that John Atkin (NJ) and Jackie James (NY/CT) also have similar power and authority.

For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings California cases:

CALIFORNIA STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

Strike 3 Holdings California Central District Court

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe infringer identified as using IP address 107.184.92.94 (Case No. 2:20-cv-07421)
v. John Doe infringer identified as using IP address 172.89.57.72 (Case No. 8:20-cv-01520)
v. John Doe infringer identified as using IP address 104.173.206.190 (Case No. 2:20-cv-07416)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.174.118.71 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06262
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 45.48.164.4 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06261)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.87.197.120 (Case No. 5:20-cv-01393)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 172.250.76.115 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06260)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 137.25.32.101 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06808)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 108.185.19.186 (Case No. 2:20-cv-06807)

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

Strike 3 Holdings California Northern District Court

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.103.236.62 (Case No. 3:20-cv-04710)
v. John Doe infringer* identified as using IP address 174.62.95.35 (Case No. 3:20-cv-04709)
v. John Doe infringer* identified as using IP address 174.62.95.35 (Case No. 4:20-cv-04709)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.169.103.145 (Case No. 5:20-cv-05221)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.150.134.57 (Case No. 3:20-cv-05220)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.150.134.57 (Case No. 4:20-cv-05220)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.169.103.145 (Case No. 4:20-cv-05221)
v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.176.167.14 (Case No. 3:20-cv-01325)

*[NOTE TO SELF: “Is there a difference between a “John Doe Subscriber” and a “John Doe infringer? No, but the title of being accused as “John Doe infringer” is funny, and here is why.]

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

Strike 3 Holdings California Southern District Court

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.176.167.14 (Case No. 3:20-cv-01325)

…Interestingly, not much going on in the California Southern District Court.

Connecticut
Connecticut Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Jacqueline M. James (Jackie James) of The James Law Firm, PLLC.

Jacqueline James used to represent Malibu Media, LLC, another prolific copyright troll. Jackie was in charge of all of the Malibu Media, LLC cases filed in the New York federal courts.

I consider Jacqueline James to be a “boss” when categorizing her among the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in the hierarchy.

Jaqueline James at one point was an important attorney filing many cases for Malibu Media, LLC. She even stayed with them after there was a shake-up of Malibu Media, LLC attorneys, but then one day she stopped filing for them.

It is important to note that Jackie James stopped representing Malibu Media, LLC because she dropped them as a client. She did not “swing from one branch to the next” by dropping one client in favor of a more profitable one. When she dropped Malibu Media, LLC as a client, she did not have another client.

It was only later that [I presume] Strike 3 Holdings contacted her and asked her to file copyright infringement lawsuits on their behalf.

Today, she appears to have independent authority and control of her cases, and she is in charge of the Strike 3 Holdings federal court lawsuits filed in New York and more recently, in Connecticut.

When negotiating cases, Jackie James is known to be a difficult negotiator, but she is also fair. Be prepared to support everything you say with facts and if needed, documentation. Jackie James is the kind of attorney who does not simply take statements at face value, but she asks questions and follow-up questions… often which lead to uncomfortable conversations. Again, however, she is not known to gouge on settlement prices, but she is a tough in her approach.

For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings Connecticut cases:

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 3:20-cv-01157, 3:20-cv-00961, and 3:20-cv-00960)

…These are newer cases, and the judge has not yet been assigned for these. I’m guessing Jackie James will be the plaintiff attorney in each of these.

UPDATE: I am happy to share that while searching for Dawn Sciarrino (when writing up the Virginia cases), I could not understand why she would take Strike 3 Holdings, LLC as a client. However, searching for her, I found that Jackie James actually listed her as an attorney under her law firm. While I will post Dawn’s page under her state, because her we are discussing Jackie, you can find Jacqueline James’ profile and website here.

New Jersey
New Jersey Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by John Atkin of The Atkin Firm, LLC.

John Atkin used to work for Fox Rothschild, LLP in New Jersey. John Atkin was the only one of the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys handling all of the New Jersey Strike 3 Holdings filings, however, at the time in which he was with Fox Rothschild, LLP, I did not get the sense that he had authority to negotiate the cases himself. Rather, it appeared as if he was local counsel filing cases for Lincoln Bandlow.

That changed in/around May, 2019. As you have read above, in my observation, John Atkin overthrew Lincoln Bandlow’s authority and carved out autonomy for himself among the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in the hierarchy. By May, 2019, he already left Fox Rothschild, LLP and started his own law firm. I learned about this when I started seeing “The Atkin Firm, LLC” on the cases in which I was representing clients rather than Fox Rothschild, LLP.

I still think that Lincoln might still be the “boss” of the various Strike 3 Holdings attorneys across the US along with the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases, but it appears to me as if John Atkin is working on his own (maybe as a co-equal boss with Lincoln Bandlow and/or Jackie James), with sole authority and decision-making power over his cases.

For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings New Jersey cases:

NEW JERSEY STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

Strike 3 Holdings New Jersey District Court

…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.109.249 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10179)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 71.245.115.134 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10177)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.15.186 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10180)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.228.165 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10185)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.126.57 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10184)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.114.252 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10183)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.24.202.59 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10173)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.127.245 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10174)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.157.64 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10181)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.82.226.89 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10178)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.71.239 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10175)

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.27.165 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10182)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.109.249 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10179)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 71.245.115.134 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10177)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.228.165 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10185)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.15.186 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10180)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.127.245 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10174)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.114.252 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10183)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.24.202.59 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10173)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.157.64 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10181)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.82.226.89 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10178)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.71.239 (Case No. 1:20-cv-10175)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.35.126.57 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10184)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.27.165 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10182)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 96.242.30.49 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10208)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 74.102.99.44 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10206)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 74.102.216.227 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10205)

…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 74.105.217.57 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10207)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.63.129.28 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10201)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.44.2 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10198)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.63.166.25 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10202)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.66.59 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10199)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.41.90 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10223)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.185.130 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10222)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.108.155 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10217)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.35.204.190 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10224)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 71.127.201.146 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10228)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.72.39.170 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10226)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.63.78.195 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10225)
…v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.88.201.138 (Case No. 3:20-cv-10229)

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

*NOTES TO SELF: There are TWO IMPORTANT reasons why Strike 3 Holdings, LLC is putting so much money into filing lawsuits in New Jersey:

1) Strike 3 Holdings, LLC almost lost New Jersey as a state in which they would be allowed by the federal court to sue defendants (for lawyers, it was bad case law). For a short while, judges stood up to Strike 3 Holdings, LLC and stopped them from being allowed to send subpoenas to ISPs to force the ISPs to hand over the subscriber information to them.

Apparently Strike 3 won that battle, so now they are taking advantage of that “WIN” and suing many defendants in New Jersey.

2) The plaintiff attorney for each of these New Jersey cases is John Atkin of the Atkin Firm, LLC. There is a history WHY John Atkin is important to New Jersey, and that history is uncovered by understanding WHAT HAPPENED with the shake-up of attorneys last year.

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

New York
New York Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Jacqueline M. James (Jackie James) of The James Law Firm, PLLC.

Just as I described in the “Connecticut” section, Jackie James used to represent Malibu Media, LLC, another prolific copyright troll. Jackie was in charge of all of the Malibu Media, LLC cases filed in the New York federal courts.

I consider Jacqueline James to be a “boss” when categorizing her among the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys in their hierarchy.

Jackie James at one point was an important attorney filing many cases for Malibu Media, LLC. She even stayed with them after there was a shake-up of Malibu Media, LLC attorneys, but then one day she stopped filing for them.

It is important to note that Jacqueline James stopped representing Malibu Media, LLC because she dropped them as a client. She did not “swing from one branch to the next” by dropping one client in favor of a more profitable one. When she dropped Malibu Media, LLC as a client, she did not have another client.

It was only later that [I presume] Strike 3 Holdings contacted her and asked her to file copyright infringement lawsuits on their behalf. Today, she appears to have independent authority and control of her cases, and she is in charge of the Strike 3 Holdings federal court lawsuits filed in New York and more recently, in Connecticut.

When negotiating cases, Jacqueline James is known to be a difficult negotiator, but she is also fair. Be prepared to support everything you say with facts and if needed, documentation. Jackie James is the kind of attorney who does not simply take statements at face value, but she asks questions and follow-up questions… often which lead to uncomfortable conversations. Again, however, she is not known to gouge on settlement prices, but she is a tough in her approach.

For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings New York cases:

NEW YORK STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

New York Eastern District Court

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 2:20-cv-03660, 2:20-cv-03654, 2:20-cv-03657, 2:20-cv-03653, 2:20-cv-03646, 2:20-cv-03659, 2:20-cv-03655, 2:20-cv-03648, 2:20-cv-03649, 2:20-cv-03658, 2:20-cv-03647, 2:20-cv-03651, 2:20-cv-03650, 2:20-cv-03656, and 2:20-cv-03399.)

New York Southern District Court

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:20-cv-06030, and 1:20-cv-05425.)

New York Western District Court

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:20-cv-01081, 1:20-cv-01079, 1:20-cv-01084, 1:20-cv-01083, 1:20-cv-01082, 1:20-cv-01085, 1:20-cv-01080, and 6:20-cv-06505.)

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

UPDATE: I am happy to share that while searching for Dawn Sciarrino (when writing up the Virginia cases), I could not understand why she would take Strike 3 Holdings, LLC as a client. However, searching for her, I found that Jackie James actually listed her as an attorney under her law firm. While I will post Dawn’s page under her state, because her we are discussing Jackie, you can find Jacqueline James’ profile and website here.

Maryland
Maryland Strike 3 Holdings cases used to be run by Jessica Haire of Fox Rothschild, LLP, but more recently, they are run by Elsy Marleni Ramos Velasquez of Clark Hill PLC.

Let’s cover Jessica Haire first.

Pre-May, 2019.

The first time I spoke to Jessica Haire was in March, 2018. She and Lincoln Bandlow were colleagues at Fox Rothschild, LLP and were working together on managing the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys and the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases. At the time, whenever I would message Lincoln Bandlow, Jessica Haire would often respond back to me on his behalf.

It is interesting to note, however, that when Lincoln Bandlow left Fox Rothschild, LLP, Jessica Haire continued to work for them. I believe she is still working for them today.

Post-May, 2019:

Elsy Marleni Ramos Velasquez of Clark Hill PLC (“Elsy Velasquez”) is the name of the Strike 3 Holdings attorney who is showing up for the current slew of Strike 3 filings in Maryland District Court. She showed up as a new attorney filing lawsuits for Strike 3 Holdings, LLC [if I recall correctly] shortly after Lincoln Bandlow left Fox Rothschild, LLP and started his new law firm.

She works out of Clark Hill PLC, and she works out of their Washington, DC office.

The first time I contacted Elsy Velasquez was in May, 2019 because she was the attorney that was taking over the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC Maryland cases after the shake-up of their attorneys.

It is important to note that after a hiatus of filings (probably due to the pandemic), Strike 3 Holdings, LLC has put a lot of faith in Elsy Velasquez by allowing her to file many cases on their behalf.

For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings Maryland cases:

MARYLAND STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

Strike 3 Holdings Maryland District Court

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe* (Case Nos. 8:20-cv-02298, 8:20-cv-02299, 8:20-cv-02300, 1:20-cv-02276, 1:20-cv-02271, 1:20-cv-02278, 1:20-cv-02277, 1:20-cv-02279, 1:20-cv-02285, 1:20-cv-02286, 1:20-cv-02284, 1:20-cv-02283, 1:20-cv-02280, 8:20-cv-02287, 8:20-cv-02289, 8:20-cv-02290, 8:20-cv-02291, 8:20-cv-02288, 8:20-cv-02293, 8:20-cv-02292, 8:20-cv-02295, 8:20-cv-02294, 8:20-cv-02296, 8:20-cv-02297, 8:20-cv-02298, 8:20-cv-02299, and 8:20-cv-02300)

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

*NOTES TO SELF: It is important to note that Strike 3 Holdings appears to be putting A LOT of money and resources into filing lawsuits in Maryland.

…The logic is that each of these defendants has money to pay a large settlement to them, or else they wouldn’t file the lawsuit against them.

Also interesting is that EVERY ONE of these Maryland cases were filed on ONE DAY — AUGUST 6TH, 2020.

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Jason M. Saruya of Clark Hill PLC.

Jason Saruya of Clark Hill PLC is the name of the attorney who is showing up for the Strike 3 filings in Pennsylvania District Court.

He works for Clark Hill PLC, and he works out of the Philadephia, PA office.

There is not much information about Jason Saruya, but from what I understand, he is a younger attorney, and he is probably working with Elsy Velasquez as his superior, as Elsy Velasquez was the attorney from Clark Hill PLC that took over the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC Maryland cases after the shake-up of their attorneys.

For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings Pennsylvania cases:

PENNSYLVANIA STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

Pennsylvania Middle District Court*

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.55.82.15 (Case No. 1:20-cv-01322)
…v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.130.61.38 (Case No. 1:20-cv-01324)
…v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.58.204.183 (Case No. 1:20-cv-01323)

[*NOTE TO SELF: It is interesting that they are filing against defendants in the Pennsylvania MIDDLE District Court, and *NOT* in the Pennsylvania EASTERN District Court (where 99% of copyright troll litigation over the years happens there). I do not have a reason why this is the case.]

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

Virginia
Virginia Strike 3 Holdings cases are run by Dawn Marie Sciarrino of Sciarrino & Shubert, PLLC (more recently, I have found that she is working for Jacqueline James, the Strike 3 Holdings attorney for the NY/CT region).

Dawn Marie Sciarrino is the name of the attorney who is showing up for the Strike 3 filings in the Virginia federal court filings.

MY ORIGINAL WRITE-UP ON DAWN:
Dawn Marie appears to be a partner in her law firm, and she works out of Centreville, VA.

There is not much information about Dawn Marie Sciarrino (even their https://www.sciarrino.com website was down when I tried to reach it).

From what I understand, she has been practicing as an attorney for many years. Her first bar was in New York in 1991, and she has represented clients before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and for the District of Columbia Circut.

What I do not understand is… [with her background, both educational and vocational] why in the world would she take Strike 3 Holdings, LLC as a client? This makes no sense to me.

UPDATED INFORMATION:
Doing further research, I was very surprised to see that Dawn Sciarrino was listed as an attorney in Jackie James’ website.

Understanding Jackie James’ background and her experience, the connection between Jackie and Dawn became clear. They know each other. It was likely Jackie who suggested that Dawn take the Virginia cases because Strike 3 Holdings, LLC needed an attorney to file lawsuits in the Virginia federal courts against those Miami-Dade Strike 3 Holdings defendants who did not settle the claims against them.

For the moment, it is noteworthy to list the newly filed Strike 3 Holdings Virginia cases:

VIRGINIA STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC CASES (7/2020 – 8/2020)

Virginia Eastern District Court

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:20-cv-00825, 1:20-cv-00823, and 1:20-cv-00824.)

It is now 8/21/2020, 8:30am CDT, and I have written up what I could find on the current list of Strike 3 Holdings attorneys and their Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases filed both in Miami-Dade, and in the federal courts. Obviously more cases are filed each day, so I will do what I can to keep it current. Also in this article, I am using a new coding feature (new for me, at least) called Shortcodes. If you notice that something isn’t working on the page, or that I broke the code, please e-mail me at [email protected].


[CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about the varioius Strike 3 Holdings attorneys and my experiences with them, you can e-mail us at info[at]cashmanlawfirm.com, you can set up a free and confidential phone consultation to speak to us about your Strike 3 Holdings, LLC case, or you can send a SMS / WhatsApp message to us at 713-364-3476 (this is our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC’s number].

CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

    NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

    Who Runs Strike 3 Holdings – Lincoln Bandlow or John Atkin?

    Strike 3 Holdings Lincoln Bandlow Law

    Who really runs Strike 3 Holdings Lincoln Bandlow or John Atkin?

    There has been confusion in recent weeks as to which Strike 3 Holdings, LLC attorney has authority to represent the Strike 3 Holdings LLC client. Is Lincoln Bandlow in charge? Or John Atkin of The Atkin Firm, LLC?

    Why do Strike 3 Holdings cases need a Kingpin?

    In bittorrent-based copyright infringement lawsuits, in order to run a multi-state set of cookie-cutter lawsuits, an attorney behind the scenes or “kingpin” is often needed (or, found). This “kingpin” attorney directs each of the other local attorneys who file Strike 3 Holdings copyright infringement lawsuits in federal courts across the US.

    A central figure, or “kingpin” is also useful to keep the Strike 3 Holdings settlements uniform. That way, whether you are a John Doe Defendant dealing with New York Strike 3 Holdings cases or California Strike 3 Holdings cases, the settlements are generally* the same.

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    • NOTE: Strike 3 Holdings settlements are not uniform. Each case has its own list of titles allegedly infringed, and the settlement amount that the Strike 3 Holdings attorney asks for is some per-title settlement number multiplied by how many titles there are.

    • For example: If there are 20 titles and the plaintiff is asking for $750/title (they do go lower), they would be asking for a $15,000 settlement. Strike 3 Holdings settlement amounts, however, are not the subject of this article.

    Returning to the concept of a “kingpin,” the Strike 3 Holdings cases have been run behind the scenes by Lincoln Bandlow, until now, a partner at Fox Rothschild LLP. Thus, whether your plaintiff attorney was Shireen Nasir, [or, John Atkin, Jacqueline James, Andy Nikolopoulos, or David Grant Crooks (all local attorneys to Lincoln Bandlow working at Fox Rothschild LLP)], Lincoln was the attorney behind the scenes directing each of the Strike 3 Holdings lawsuits across the US.

    The Strike 3 Holdings Attorney Shake-Up

    Over the past few weeks, however, there has been a shake-up (perhaps a power struggle) between the attorneys at Fox Rothschild LLP. Rumors have been told to me that attorneys at Fox Rothschild and Lincoln Bandlow have been experiencing “tension.”

    It wasn’t clear to me whether the issue was that Fox Rothschild LLP did not want to be known for suing thousands of bittorrent users in a copyright troll-like fashion, or whether there was a power struggle between Lincoln Bandlow, a partner at Fox Rothschild LLP, and the other @foxrothschild.com attorneys from other offices across the US who were filing bittorrent-based copyright infringement cases under Lincoln’s direction.

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    PERHAPS the Strike 3 Holdings local attorneys wanted to be compensated for the time they spent in filing the cases — for example, in their annual billable hours requirement that attorneys working for a law firm often face.

    Or, PERHAPS there was a disagreement about MONEY, namely, which attorneys would be financially compensated when a Strike 3 Holdings settlement is paid. MAYBE one attorney “owned” the Strike 3 Holdings LLC client (my guess, Lincoln), and PERHAPS only he was compensated on a contingency basis for each of the clients who settled.

    Who knows what was really going on behind the scenes.

    THE FIRST DEFECTION: JOHN ATKIN.

    A few weeks ago, I noticed that John Atkin (one of Lincoln Bandlow’s local counsel) broke away from Fox Rothschild and started his own law firm — The Atkin Firm, LLC.

    Atkin then started filing Strike 3 Holdings LLC cases using his own law firm as the attorney representing Strike 3 Holdings, LLC. It occurred to me that PERHAPS John Atkin’s flight from Fox Rothschild LLP could be a defection because he was taking the Strike 3 Holdings LLC client with him.

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    Alternatively, as many copyright troll attorneys have done in the past, they calculate how much money they could make in commissions (contingency fees) if they themselves take a percentage of every settlement amount paid by a Strike 3 Holdings John Doe Defendant.

    They calculate how quickly they could “get rich” from collecting settlements and they decide to represent the “dark side” of copyright trolling; in representing the copyright troll, they become a copyright troll attorney themselves (a plaintiff attorney who files cookie-cutter lawsuits in federal court with the purpose of collecting settlements from each and every defendant who is sued, regardless of whether the defendant actually did the download or not).

    With my potential apologies to John Atkin (for whom I do not yet know the circumstances behind his defection from Fox Rothschild LLP), my initial thought was “here is another copyright troll attorney who thinks he could get rich suing defendants.” However, to my surprise, a week ago, I saw a second defection from Fox Rothschild LLP which was a surprise to me.

    THE SECOND DEFECTION: LINCOLN BANDLOW.

    To my shock, this past week, Lincoln Bandlow (partner) left Fox Rothschild and started his own law firm — “Lincoln Balndlow Law (BandlowLaw.com),” or the “Law Offices of Lincoln Bandlow, P.C.”. The “kingpin” left the law firm which [presumably] he worked many years to climb the ladder and become a partner. Why?!?

    The answer is that I simply don’t yet know. I could only assume that the other Fox Rothschild LLP partners did not allow him to run the Strike 3 Holdings cases the way he wanted to run them. Or, perhaps the other partners were taking a large share of the settlement profits, all of which Lincoln could take for himself if he was not tethered to a law firm who pays him a salary.

    Thus, Lincoln Bandlow, partner of Fox Rothschild LLP defected too, and started his own law firm… and he took the Strike 3 Holdings LLC client with him (or so it seemed).

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    CONFUSION: WHICH ATTORNEY HAS ACTUAL AUTHORITY TO REPRESENT STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS?

    The confusion as to which attorney had authority to represent Strike 3 Holdings, LLC became apparent on the court dockets of the hundreds of Strike 3 Holdings LLC cases across the US.

    The new cases now list John Atkin of The Atkin Firm, LLC as the “lead attorney – attorney to be noticed” on the court dockets. This implies that JOHN ATKIN’S FIRM has authority to represent Strike 3 Holdings, LLC in these cases and NOT FOX ROTHSCHILD.

    However, until now, Fox Rothschild LLP has been running ALL of the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases with with Lincoln Bandlow (partner) as the known “kingpin” of the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases.

    Two sets of attorneys, each one claiming that they alone are representing the Strike 3 Holdings LLC client.

    Then when Lincoln Bandlow left Fox Rothschild LLP, the problem compounded itself. Now on dockets across the US, names like Shireen Nasir of Fox Rothschild, or Andy Nikolopoulos and David Grant Crooks of Fox Rothschild, are STILL LISTED as the attorney of record, but their “kingpin boss” Lincoln Bandlow no longer works for the firm.

    Lincoln presumably took the Strike 3 Holdings LLC client with him when he left, and even now, he is still representing the Strike 3 Holdings LLC client.

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    With different attorneys claiming to each represent the same client, and apparently the “wrong” attorney is listed on the case dockets across the US, there was (and in some cases, still is) confusion as to which plaintiff attorney is authorized to represent Strike 3 Holdings LLC.

    THE PROBLEM: THE WRONG ATTORNEYS ARE LISTED ON STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS DOCKETS

    Honestly, I don’t care if attorneys have a “turf war” over a client, but there is a duty to properly list the attorney representing the client on the court docket. Otherwise, how would we know who to contact when sending over a letter of representation to the “other side”?

    If the former attorney [of Fox Rothschild LLP] is no longer representing the client, that attorney needs to either withdraw as that client’s attorney, or they need to replace themselves with the attorney having actual authority to represent the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC client.

    It is an confusing problem to have one attorney represent the Strike 3 Holdings client on the court docket, and to have another attorney claim to be Strike 3 Holdings’ attorney.

    THE SOLUTION: FRACTURED DECENTRALIZED AUTONOMY OF DIFFERENT STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS ATTORNEYS

    Just so that we are clear, I am pretty sure this “turf war” within the Strike 3 Holdings attorneys is probably still going on.

    I think that at the moment, Lincoln Bandlow and John Atkin are negotiating with Emilie Kennedy, the General Counsel for Strike 3 Holdings, LLC (and former attorney to Keith Lipscomb, the former “kingpin” of the Malibu Media, LLC cases) to determine which of them have AUTONOMY to handle which Strike 3 Holdings, LLC cases in which federal courts.

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    I also assume that Jackie James (in NY, NJ, CT) also is in the process of (or has already negotiated) autonomy in deciding how to run the cases and how to be compensated for her efforts in the cases she has filed.

    Thus, I suspect that we will soon be seeing multiple attorneys each with authority to negotiate the claims on behalf of Strike 3 Holdings, LLC.

    RECENT STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS CASES (*UPDATED* AS OF 2/25/2020)

    CALIFORNIA:

    Recent Cases filed in the California Central District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe (Case Nos. 8:19-cv-02431, 2:19-cv-10671, 2:19-cv-10672, 2:19-cv-10677, 2:20-cv-00042)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 45.49.233.148 (Case No. 2:19-cv-10673)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 75.84.181.123 (Case No. 2:19-cv-10674)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 104.35.148.0 (Case No. 2:20-cv-01436)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 45.48.102.254 (Case No. 2:20-cv-01438)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 104.173.187.226 (Case No. 2:20-cv-01730)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 172.91.221.26 (Case No. 2:20-cv-01736)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 172.117.191.225 (Case No. 2:20-cv-00034)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 172.250.65.102 (Case No. 2:20-cv-00024)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 47.151.151.253 (Case No. 2:20-cv-00238)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.85.39.241 (Case No. 2:20-cv-00975)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.174.248.45 (Case No. 2:20-cv-01003)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.80.177.217 (Case No. 2:20-cv-00998)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.84.62.40 (Case No. 2:20-cv-01001)

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    Recent Cases filed in the California Northern District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 24.130.70.230 (Case No. 4:19-cv-08231)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.102.26.213 (Case No. 3:19-cv-08239)

    Recent Cases filed in the California Southern District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 3:19-cv-02452, 3:19-cv-02488, 3:20-cv-00209, 3:20-cv-00308, Case No. 3:20-cv-00067, 3:20-cv-00068)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe infringer identified as using IP address 68.101.221.150 (Case No. 3:20-cv-00309)

    CONNECTICUT:

    Recent Case filed in the Connecticut District Court (as of 2/25.2020) 
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:20-cv-00100)

    FLORIDA:

    Recent Cases filed in the Florida Middle District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address 35.138.167.172 (Case No. 8:19-cv-03100) Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:19-cv-03143)

    Recent Case filed in the Florida Southern District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:20-cv-20499, 1:20-cv-20503, 1:20-cv-20517, 1:20-cv-20516, 1:20-cv-20506, 1:20-cv-20647)

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    ILLINOIS:

    Recent Cases filed in the Illinois Northern District Court (as of 2/25/2020) 
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:19-cv-08148, 1:19-cv-08163, 1:20-cv-00773, 1:20-cv-01243, 1:20-cv-01301)
    …v. John Doe Subscriber assigned IP address 205.178.124.205 (Case No. 1:20-cv-00161)
    v. John Doe infringer identified as using IP address 108.225.112 (Case No. 1:20-cv-00482)

    MICHIGAN:

    Recent Cases filed in the Michigan Eastern District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    …v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP Address 108.244.198.157 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10098)
    v. John Doe infringer identified as using IP Address 99.188.204.18 (Case No. 2:20-cv-10143)

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    NEVADA:

    Recent Cases filed in the Nevada District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 Holdings v. JOHN DOE IP Address 70.170.50.85 (Case No. 2:20-cv-00372)
    Strike 3 Holdings v. JOHN DO IP Address 72.193.217.207 (Case No. 2:20-cv-00373)

    NEW JERSEY:

    Recent Case filed in the New Jersey District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. JOHN DOE infringer identified as using IP ADDRESS 73.193.240.189 (Case No. 2:20-cv-01616)

    NEW YORK:

    Recent Cases filed in the New York Eastern District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address 67.245.246.132 (Case No. 1:19-cv-07256)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe (Case No. 1:20-cv-00526)

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    Recent Cases filed in the New York Southern District Court (as of 2/25/2020) 
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case Nos. 1:19-cv-11466, 1:19-cv-11464, 1:20-cv-01435, 1:20-cv-01528, 1:20-cv-01529, 1:20-cv-01525, 1:20-cv-00554, 1:20-cv-00819)

    Recent Case filed in the New York Western District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 6:20-cv-06113)

    PENNSYLVANIA:

    Recent Case filed in the Pennsylvania Eastern District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 5:19-cv-06010)

    VIRGINIA:

    Recent Case filed in the Virginia Eastern District Court (as of 2/25/2020)
    Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:20-cv-00171)

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    Current List of Strike 3 Holdings LLC Miami Dade Florida-based lawsuits.

    Here is the current (updated) list of Strike 3 Holdings LLC Miami-Dade Florida lawsuits:

    STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. UNKNOWN INFRINGERS LISTED ON EXHIBIT 1

    Local Case Numbers: 2019-027829-CC-05, 2019-027599-CC-05, 2019-026368-CC-05, 2019-026371-CC-05, 2019-025653-CC-05, 2019-025655-CC-05, 2019-025662-CC-05, 2019-024463-CC-05, 2019-024467-CC-05, 2019-024647-CC-05, 2020-001616-CC-05, 2020-001652-CC-05, 2019-032919-CC-05, 2019-032825-CC-05, 2019-032439-CC-05, 2019-032122-CC-05, 2019-031035-CC-05, 2019-030496-CC-05, 2019-030040-CC-05, 2019-028802-CC-05, 2019-028412-CC-05, 2019-028410-CC-05, 2020-002968-CC-05, 2020-002021-CC-05, 2020-002024-CC-05, 2020-002019-CC-05, 2020-003890-CC-05, 2020-003891-CC-05, 2020-003737-CC-05.

    State Case Numbers: 132019CC027829000005, 132019CC027599000005, 132019CC026368000005, 132019CC026371000005, 132019CC025653000005, 132019CC025655000005, 132019CC025662000005, 132019CC024463000005, 132019CC024467000005, 132019CC024647000005, 132020CC001616000005, 132020CC001652000005, 132019CC032919000005, 132019CC032825000005, 132019CC032439000005, 132019CC032122000005, 132019CC031035000005, 132019CC030496000005, 132019CC030040000005, 132019CC028802000005, 132019CC028412000005, 132019CC028410000005, 132020CC002968000005, 132020CC002021000005, 132020CC002024000005, 132020CC002019000005, 132020CC003890000005, 132020CC003891000005, 132020CC003737000005.

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    OTHER ARTICLES WRITTEN ON THE STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS LLC LAWSUITS.

    Below are articles we at the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC have written on the Strike 3 Holdings, LLC plaintiff:

    Just The Facts: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC,” written on 11/5/2017

    Everything you need to know in one page about your Strike 3 Holdings, LLC (“Blacked, Tushy, and Vixen brand”) adult movie lawsuits and ISP subpoenas,” written on 11/5/2017

    HUMOR: Did Strike 3 Just Call Their Defendant “John Doe Infringer”?” written on 2/20/2020

    Why incorrect attorneys are listed on Strike 3 Holdings LLC case dockets,” written on 5/3/2019

    How Similar are Strike 3 Holdings and Malibu Media Lawsuits?” written on 11/15/2017

    Why Copyright Troll Non-Practicing Entities Should NOT Benefit From Copyright Laws,” written on 11/15/2017

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >

    ARTICLES WRITTEN ABOUT THE 2019-2020 “MIAMI-DADE STRIKE 3” FLORIDA COUNTY COURT CASES:

    INITIAL ARTICLE EXPLAINING HOW THEY ARE USING THE STATE COURTS TO UNMASK DEFENDANTS’ IDENTITIES.:

    Strike 3 Holdings is NOT suing Miami-Dade County defendants for copyright infringement,” written on 10/31/2019

    FOLLOW-UP ARTICLE EXPOSING THE ATTORNEYS BEHIND THE SCHEME

    Strike 3 Holdings Attorneys in Miami-Dade Florida County Have a “Behind The Scenes” Shadow,” written on 1/20/2020

    RECENT ARTICLE EXPLAINING HOW DEFENSE ATTORNEYS ARE LURING DEFENDANTS IN WITH A “BAIT AND SWITCH” WHICH ENDS UP FORCING THEM TO SETTLE OR BE SUED.

    Why filing a motion to quash in a Strike 3 Holdings LLC Miami-Dade Florida case might not be the correct approach,” written on 2/10/2020

    Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > > >


    [CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: If you have a question for an attorney about the Strike 3 Holdings LLC cases and options on how to proceed (even specifically for your case), you can e-mail us at info[at]cashmanlawfirm.com, you can set up a free and confidential phone consultation to speak to us about your Strike 3 Holdings LLC case, or you can call us at 713-364-3476 (this is our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC’s number].

    CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

      NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

      Which Lipscomb attorneys stayed with Malibu Media, LLC?

      malibu-media-case-consolidations

      RECAP: MALIBU MEDIA, LLC APPEARS TO BE FOCUSING MOST OF THEIR FUNDS ON THREE OF THEIR ATTORNEYS WHO ARE FILING A MAJORITY OF THE LAWSUITS. THESE LAWSUITS ARE BEING FILED IN THE NEW YORK ‘TRI-STATE’ AREA (NY/NJ/CT) AND TEXAS. BUT, LAWSUITS FOR SOME NOTICEABLE “TERRITORIES” ARE STILL FILED BY OLDER MALIBU ATTORNEYS.  I CALL THESE ATTORNEYS MEMBERS OF THE ‘OLD GUARD’.

      NOTE: BEFORE READING THIS ARTICLE: If you have not already done so, and you are implicated as a John Doe in a Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, read these first:
      1) “Everything You Need To Know in One Page About Your Malibu Media, LLC (X-Art) Lawsuit [FAQ]
      2) “In-Depth Malibu Media.  Their Lawsuits, Their Strategies, and Their Settlements

      FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: To set up a free consultation to speak to an attorney about your Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, click here.  Lastly, please feel free to e-mail me at info [at] cashmanlawfirm.com, or call 713-364-3476 to speak to me now about your case (I do prefer you read the articles first), or to get your questions answered.

      WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE ‘OLD GUARD’ ATTORNEYS LOYAL TO MALIBU MEDIA?

      There are a few attorneys who stayed loyal to Malibu Media, LLC after they split from Keith Lipscomb. Jackie James, by the way, is one of them, and this is one of the reason she is likely being rewarded by Malibu Media giving her the ability to file over 300+ lawsuits, each lawsuit possibly pulling in $10,000-$25,000 in settlement dollars (of which she likely receives a ‘contingency fee’ in the form of commissions from each settlement). I estimate that in the past year, Jackie has made Malibu Media, LLC $4.5 Million Dollars in settlements, which means that she has likely grossed over $1 Million Dollars in commissions taken from the life savings hard-working New York (and now Connecticut) families in just ONE YEAR alone.

      However, as horrible as that is for New York families who have paid settlement amounts to her, Jackie is a superstar for the Malibu Media brand.  Malibu Media has most recently allowed her to expand her territory to include all lawsuits in Connecticut, and to date, she has filed 38 cases in ONE MONTH alone.

      As much as she apparently has the favor from the Malibu Media, LLC / X-Art copyright holders, there appears to be one state in her corner of the “tri-state” that Jackie has not been able to infiltrate — NEW JERSEY, and I think I know why.

      PATRICK CERILLO (NJ)

      In New Jersey resides Patrick Cerillo (“Pat Cerillo”), one of the “old guard” of attorneys who were with Malibu Media, LLC since they started filing lawsuits.  Pat has his law firm in New Jersey, and to date, he alone has personally filed 14% of all Malibu Media, LLC cases in 2017 (this amounts to 38 cases against John Doe Defendants). So as much as superstar Jackie would no doubt love to take over that lucrative territory, for now, she’s probably locked out of that territory.

      Pat’s contact information is being listed here so that you can recognize his name as it is found on the subpoena area of the paperwork you receive from your ISP.  It is almost NEVER a good idea to contact your plaintiff attorney directly.

      PATRICK JOSEPH CERILLO
      4 WALTER FORAN BLVD., SUITE 402
      FLEMINGTON, NJ 08822
      Email: [email protected]

      JON HOPPE (MD)

      There is one other name of someone I consider to be one of the upper ranks of the Malibu Media LLC “old guard,” and that is Jon Alexander Hoppe (“Jon Hoppe”).

      Jon and I first spoke in March, 2012 when someone (possibly Jon, but my best guess with hindsight, Keith Lipscomb) filed an initial set of Malibu Media, LLC cases using his PACER account. It was this conversation that tipped me off that Lipscomb was likely filing the lawsuits using the PACER accounts of the various local attorneys, because when I first spoke to Jon and sent over a letter of representation for an early Malibu Media, LLC client, he did not even know that he filed my client’s case.

      Jon Hoppe has since become one of the upper ranks of the Malibu Media attorneys.

      At one point, I understood [from speaking to newer attorneys] that Jon Hoppe was the one “in charge” and “with authority to negotiate settlements for Malibu Media,” even though he had no connection to the lawsuits that were filed by other attorneys in the other states’ federal courts. In sum, Jon Hoppe still maintains control over the Maryland lawsuits, and to date, he has filed only seven (7) lawsuits.  This would be a big deal if there were more lawsuits (Jon only filed a mere 3% of all Malibu Media cases filed in 2017), especially since Maryland is so close to Washington, DC where he has his law office.

      Jon Hoppe’s information can be found below:

      Jon Alexander Hoppe
      Law Offices of Jon A. Hoppe, Esquire
      1050 Seventeenth Street, NW, Suite 1000
      Washington, DC 20036
      Email: [email protected]

      It would not do justice to end the article here, but that is exactly what I am doing because I have made my point.

      SUMMARY

      In sum, there are new attorneys who have only recently started filing lawsuits in 2016 and regardless of the high quantity of settlements they ‘extort’ from John Doe Defendants in the Malibu Media, LLC lawsuits, older, more seasoned attorneys who were with Malibu Media, LLC since the beginning (in 2012) still keep their ‘territories’, even if they are not filing as many cases.

      Thus, with the Malibu Media, LLC copyright holder, there appears to be an “old guard” and a “new guard” when it comes to ‘into which federal district courts a rising star can file John Doe lawsuits,’ and if there is a member of the “old guard” in place, the “new guard” may not enter his territory.


      FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT MALIBU MEDIA, LLC:Again, if you have been implicated as a John Doe defendant in a Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, there are TWO (2) main articles you should read immediately:

      1) “Everything You Need To Know in One Page About Your Malibu Media, LLC (X-Art) Lawsuit [FAQ],” and then
      2) “In-Depth Malibu Media.  Their Lawsuits, Their Strategies, and Their Settlements.”

      FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: To set up a free consultation to speak to an attorney about your Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, click here.  Lastly, please feel free to e-mail me at [email protected], or call 713-364-3476 to speak to me now about your case (I do prefer you read the articles first), or to get your questions answered.

      CONTACT FORM: Alternatively, sometimes people just like to contact me using one of these forms.  If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

        NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

        Cases Filed in the Maryland District Court (7)
        Attorney: Jon Alexander Hoppe (“Jon Hoppe”) of the Law Office of Jon a Hoppe, Esquire

        Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:17-cv-00397)
        Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:17-cv-00396)
        Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00402)
        Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:17-cv-00401)
        Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00398)
        Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00399)
        Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:17-cv-00400)

        Cases Filed in the New Jersey District Court (38)
        Attorney: Patrick Joseph Cerillo (“Pat Cerillo”)

        MALIBU MEDIA , LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 24.0.207.93 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01239)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01246)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01251)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.206.172 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01172)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.167.50 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01185)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.5.52.134 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01182)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.53.147.136 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01183)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.53.252.54 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01193)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.3.124.255 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01228)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.3.54.44 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01232)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.63.249.136 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01233)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.70.197.251 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01234)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.70.93.127 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01236)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 67.82.37.90 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01252)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 67.83.64.114 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01271)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 67.83.77.86 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01272)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.117.66.98 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01261)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.118.248.215 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01273)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.122.18.0 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01275)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.141.237.206 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01262)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.82.239.77 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01265)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.88.211.121 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01279)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.10.138.235 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01266)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address 73.199.240.186 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01229)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address 96.248.95.37 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01268)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER IP ADDRESS 108.35.167.198 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01180)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER IP ADDRESS 108.53.193.228 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01188)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE, SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.116.23 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01179)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01237)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01240)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.124.120.156 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01276)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 71.172.15.229 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01277)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.160.218.175 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01307)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.194.168.244 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01310)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.197.106.118 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01315)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.248.226.136 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01317)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 76.116.108.250 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01319)
        MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 96.57.99.138 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01321)


        CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

          NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

          What else can you tell me about the Malibu Media cases?

          [2017 UPDATE:] The best way to learn about Malibu Media, LLC is to read what happened to them as it happened.  The list of stories below (in the order I listed them) tell the Malibu Media story in a way that you will understand them.

          Confirmed: Malibu Media invests $400 filing fees @$20K/month

          malibu-media-case-consolidations

          Malibu Media is spending $20K EACH MONTH on filing fees.

          Malibu Media, LLC (“X-Art”) would not continue filing lawsuits (and paying a filing fee of $400 per lawsuit) unless the settlement numbers were staggeringly higher to justify that upfront outlay of cash. In the last three months alone, I viewed at least 204 cases filed which @$400/case, cost Malibu Media, LLC at least $81,600 in filing fees alone.

          This $81,600 number itself is a bit interesting to me because in December, I wrote an article expressing my suspicions that “MALIBU MEDIA, LLC APPEARS TO BE ON A $20,000/MONTH FILING BUDGET.” In that article, I estimated that every 90 days, Malibu Media, LLC files roughly 100 new lawsuits, “like the breath of a dragon, or in in the spirit of their name, like the ebb and flow of the waves that crash across the Malibu shores.”

          Since the last set of Malibu Media filings were in October 2016 and we have seen NO FILINGS from Malibu in the recent months of November, December, and January (90 days of SILENCE), it only makes sense that in February of 2017, we had a whole slew of lawsuits that flooded the courts.

          NOTE: BEFORE READING THIS ARTICLE: If you have not already done so, and you are implicated as a John Doe in a Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, read these first:
          1) “Everything You Need To Know in One Page About Your Malibu Media, LLC (X-Art) Lawsuit [FAQ]
          2) “In-Depth Malibu Media.  Their Lawsuits, Their Strategies, and Their Settlements

          FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: To set up a free consultation to speak to an attorney about your Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, click here.  Lastly, please feel free to e-mail me at info [at] cashmanlawfirm.com, or call 713-364-3476 to speak to me now about your case (I do prefer you read the articles first), or to get your questions answered.

          How did I estimate Malibu Media would spend $20,000/month?

          July = 75 filings x $400 per filing = $30,000
          August = 59 filings x $400 per filing = $23,600 (-16 cases)
          September = ZERO FILINGS. (-75 cases)
          October = 109 filings x $400 per filing = $43.600
          November = ZERO FILINGS. (-75 cases)
          December = ZERO FILINGS. (-75 cases)
          January = ZERO FILINGS. (-75 cases)
          February = 204 filings x $400 per filing = $81,600

          Two items to note:

          1) Malibu Media is SLIGHTLY UNDER BUDGET (which means that we should expect to see roughly 20 more cases in their next batch of filings).

          2) Since the April 2016 breakup of Malibu Media, LLC and their former ‘mastermind’ Keith Lipscomb (who they sued for not sharing the settlement funds he ‘extorted’ from John Doe Defendants [harsh words, yes, but not the point of this article]), understanding how much money Malibu Media, LLC is spending can help us understand how much they expect to receive for that money.

          For the purposes of this short article, it appears as if months later, Malibu Media still appears to be keeping close to a $20,000 monthly budget of filing new cases.  It also appears as if Malibu Media is allocating their funds to file new cases along the NY/NJ/CT Tri-State area, and Texas.

          What else can you tell me about the Malibu Media cases?

          [2017 UPDATE] The best way to learn about Malibu Media, LLC is to read what happened to them as it happened.  The list of stories below (in the order I listed them) tell the Malibu Media story in a way that you will understand them.


          FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT MALIBU MEDIA, LLC:Again, if you have been implicated as a John Doe defendant in a Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, there are TWO (2) main articles you should read immediately:

          1) “Everything You Need To Know in One Page About Your Malibu Media, LLC (X-Art) Lawsuit [FAQ],” and then
          2) “In-Depth Malibu Media.  Their Lawsuits, Their Strategies, and Their Settlements.”

          FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT WITH AN ATTORNEY: To set up a free consultation to speak to an attorney about your Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, click here.  Lastly, please feel free to e-mail me at info[at] cashmanlawfirm.com, or call 713-364-3476 to speak to me now about your case (I do prefer you read the articles first), or to get your questions answered.

          CONTACT FORM: Alternatively, sometimes people just like to contact me using one of these forms.  If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

            NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

            shalta book now cta

            2017 Malibu Media – Which Attorneys Filed Cases and Where?

            malibu-media-case-consolidations

            MALIBU MEDIA, LLC APPEARS TO BE FOCUSING MOST OF THEIR FUNDS ON THREE OF THEIR ATTORNEYS WHO ARE FILING A MAJORITY OF THE LAWSUITS. THESE LAWSUITS ARE BEING FILED IN THE NEW YORK ‘TRI-STATE’ AREA (NY/NJ/CT) AND TEXAS.

            If you have not already done so, and you are implicated as a John Doe in a Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, read these first:
            1) “Everything You Need To Know in One Page About Your Malibu Media, LLC (X-Art) Lawsuit [FAQ]
            2) “In-Depth Malibu Media.  Their Lawsuits, Their Strategies, and Their Settlements

            [FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT WITH AN ATTORNEY: Click here for more general information about Malibu Media, LLC lawsuits, their tactics, and their strategies.  To set up a free consultation to speak to an attorney about your Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, click here.  Lastly, please feel free to e-mail me at [email protected], or call 713-364-3476 to speak to me now about your case (I do prefer you read the articles first), or to get your questions answered.]

            WHICH ATTORNEYS ARE FILING MOST OF THE MALIBU MEDIA, LLC LAWSUITS?

            Jacqueline M. James in NY/CT (78), Pat Cerillo in NJ (38) and Andrew Kumar / Michael Lowenberg of the Lowenberg Law Firm in TX (42).

            What is the relevance of these three attorneys?

            JACQUELINE JAMES (NY, CT)

            Jacqueline James (“Jackie”) has been filing lawsuits for Malibu Media, LLC since 2015. She is not one of the “original” copyright trolls (Malibu Media, LLC has been filing lawsuits since 2/20/2012 [based on my first contact with them]). However, Jackie is more than willing to start fights with judges and other attorneys, and she has needed to change how she files her lawsuits and how she interacts with John Doe Defendants and even how she treats other attorneys because she has developed a reputation where the word “harassment” has been thrown around more than a few times.

            2018 UPDATE: Jackie James is no longer representing Malibu Media, LLC.  While we were opponents on many cases, I did get to know her (as much as was possible).  In hindsight, she has always been tough when negotiating a settlement, but she has always been fair (to the extent any of these cases are “fair”).  The biggest change in my view of her happened when she stopped representing Malibu Media, LLC.  Malibu has many issues, and in my opinion, they suffer from a lack of a moral compass.  My view of Jackie changed for the better when I learned that she decided to no longer represent Malibu as their attorney.  That was no doubt a lot of “business” to give up, and given the circumstances, she did it in the best way possible.  After she left, Kevin Conway happily took over each of her cases, and is now Malibu Media’s NY / CT attorney.

            These days, Jackie has taken on Malibu Media LLC’s “sister” as a client — Strike 3 Holdings, LLC.  The lawsuits are almost identical to Malibu’s, however, of the two companies, Strike 3 Holdings appears to be run significantly more “ethically” than the Malibu cases are.  This is not to say that Strike 3 Holdings, LLC is not engaging in copyright trolling — they are — however, their “tactics” are much more friendly than what I have even heard in recent months since she has stopped representing Malibu Media LLC.

            I am listing Jackie’s information here just so you can recognize her name on the subpoena area of the paperwork you receive from your ISP.  It is almost NEVER a good idea to contact your plaintiff attorney directly:

            Jacqueline M. James
            The James Law Firm PPLC
            445 Hamilton Avenue
            Suite 1102
            White Plains, NY 10601
            Email: [email protected]

            2018 UPDATETo keep things up to date, I am also now listing Kevin Conway’s information here so that you will recognize his name on the subpoena paperwork.  Again, it is never a good idea to speak to the plaintiff attorney directly:

            Kevin T. Conway, Esq.
            664 Chestnut Ridge Road
            Spring Valley, NY 10977
            E-mail: [email protected]

            ANDREW KUMAR / MICHAEL LOWENBERG (TX)

            Andrew Kumar and Michael Lowenberg are a different type of Malibu Media, LLC copyright troll attorneys. Andrew and Mike became one of Malibu Media, LLC’s local counsel at the end of 2016 (“fresh meat,” so to speak), and my best guess is that they were hired by Malibu Media directly, or by Carl Crowell who has taken over the role of managing each and every Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit across the U.S. (I say this because the entity behind Malibu Media, LLC is Guardaley [a german company], and now they are working with Carl Crowell to replace Keith Lipscomb after their relationship with Lipscomb soured in April, 2016). Andrew and Mike both are too “new” to the Malibu Media lawsuits to have gained a reputation yet, but nevertheless, our Texas federal judges have allowed them free reign to file 75+ lawsuits without much of an objection.

            2018 UPDATE: It must have been a coincidence that I wrote about both Jackie James (NY) and Andrew Kumar / Michael Lowenberg (TX) in the same article.  Likely for the same reasons that Jackie James stopped representing Malibu Media, LLC, I saw similar tensions arising between these two and Malibu Media, LLC as well.  Even though I called them on it and asked them what was going on behind the scenes, and although they appeared jaded by what was happening at Malibu, they denied that there was a problem.

            Out of nowhere, one day I learned that they too were no longer representing Malibu Media, LLC.  In their place is Malibu Media’s new local counsel, Paul Beik.  As of updating this article, I do not yet have an opinion of Paul.  [05/2019 UPDATE: Now I do have an opinion of Paul Beik.] Beik came in as a Malibu Media, LLC local counsel for our Texas cases after the big changes happened with Malibu Media, LLC.  Paul seems to be comfortable with the new “rules” and this is not a positive for him, as Malibu Media, LLC has gotten a lot worse over the last few months.

            Andrew and Mike’s contact information is being listed here so that you can recognize their names as it they found on the subpoena area of the paperwork you receive from your ISP (you will usually find one name, or the other).  Again — it is almost NEVER a good idea to contact your plaintiff attorney directly.

            Andrew Darshan Kumar
            Michael J. Lowenberg
            Lowenberg Law Firm
            7941 Katy Fwy., #306
            Houston, TX 77024
            Email: [email protected]

            Paul Beik’s contact information is being listed here so that you can recognize his name as it is found on the subpoena area of the paperwork you receive from your ISP.

            Paul S. Beik
            Beik Law Firm, PLLC
            8100 Washington Avenue, Suite 1000
            Houston, Texas 77007
            E-mail: [email protected]

            WHY ISN’T JACKIE JAMES FILING THE NEW JERSEY MALIBU MEDIA CASES?

            Although Jacqueline James and Andrew Kumar / Mike Lowenberg (and now Paul Beik) each belong to a “new generation” of Malibu Media, LLC copyright infringement attorneys (“copyright trolls”), there are still a set of OLDER, MORE EXPERIENCED MALIBU MEDIA, LLC ATTORNEYS (I call them the “OLD GUARD”), some of whom stayed loyal to Malibu Media, LLC when their relationship with Lipscomb went sour. In New Jersey, Patrick Cerillo (or, “Pat Cerillo”) is one of those older attorneys who remained loyal to Malibu Media, LLC.

            PATRICK CERILLO (NJ)

            Patrick J. Cerillo is one of the “old guard” of attorneys who stayed loyal to Malibu Media, LLC after they split from Keith Lipscomb.  He resides in New Jersey. So as much as Jackie James would no doubt love to take over the New Jersey Malibu Media, LLC cases, for now, Pat Cerillo has a “lock” on that territory.

            Patrick’s contact information is being listed here so that you can recognize his name as it is found on the subpoena area of the paperwork you receive from your ISP.  Again — it is almost NEVER a good idea to contact your plaintiff attorney directly.

            PATRICK JOSEPH CERILLO
            4 WALTER FORAN BLVD., SUITE 402
            FLEMINGTON, NJ 08822
            Email: [email protected]

            Why is me being licensed in New York relevant to you?

            Because these courts are in my home turf. Before moving our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC lawfirm to Houston, TX in 2010, I was (and continue to be) licensed to practice law in New York. I grew up in New York, I went to law school in New York, I know many federal judges in New York, and I understand the way the federal courts operate in that state. I have lived in both New York and New Jersey most of my life, and the “tri-state area” (NY/NJ/CT) is where I have most of my legal contacts.

            Why is me being licensed in Texas relevant to you?

            Because as of 2010, we moved our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC practice to Houston, TX. Since we opened our doors, we have practiced *ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY* in federal court practice. I took the bar exam here, I have represented possibly hundreds of clients here in Texas exclusively for bittorrent-based copyright infringement lawsuits, and again, I know the federal judges here, how their courts operate, and this is my home turf.

            What else can you tell me about the Malibu Media cases?

            The best way to learn about Malibu Media, LLC is to read what happened to them as it happened.  The list of stories below (in the order I listed them) tell the Malibu Media story in a way that you will understand them.

            SUMMARY

            There is obviously more to go into, specifically about the topic of Malibu Media LLC’s “old guard” (veteran attorneys, some from 2012), and the “new guard” (new attorneys hired slightly before or after the relationship between Malibu Media and Keith Lipscomb soured.  Also, I will shortly be posting a follow-up analysis confirming the initial research that Malibu Media, LLC is on a $20,000/month budget.

            For the purposes of this e-mail, Malibu Media is allocating their money to split the new cases among the NY/NJ/CT Tri-State area, and Texas.

            FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT MALIBU MEDIA, LLC:  Click here for more general information about Malibu Media, LLC lawsuits, their tactics, and their strategies.

            FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT AN ATTORNEY: To set up a free consultation to speak to an attorney about your Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, click here.  Lastly, please feel free to e-mail me at [email protected], or call 713-364-3476 to speak to me now about your case (I do prefer you read the articles first), or to get your questions answered.

            CONTACT FORM: Alternatively, sometimes people just like to contact me using one of these forms.  If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

              NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

              Here is the breakdown of Malibu Media, LLC cases filed THIS YEAR, 2017! (sorted by attorney/quantity):

              Attorney Jackie James Filed Cases (28%)
              Connecticut (38 Cases)
              New York (40 Cases)

              Attorneys Andrew Kumar & Michael Lowenberg Filed Cases (16%)
              Texas (42 Cases)

              Attorney Pat Cerillo Filed Cases (14%)
              New Jersey (38 Cases)

              Attorney Joel Bernier Filed Cases (6%)
              Michigan (MIED) (16 Cases)

              Attorney Mary Schulz Filed Cases (4%)
              Illinois (ILND) (12 Cases)

              Attorney Jon Hoppe Filed Cases (3%)
              Maryland (7 Cases)

              Attorney Jordan Rushie Filed Cases (3%)
              Pennsylvania (PAED) (8 Cases)

              Attorney John Decker Filed Cases (1%)
              Virginia (VAED) (3 Cases)

              LIST OF MALIBU CASES FILED TO DATE (2017 CASES ONLY)

              Cases in the Connecticut District Court (38)
              Attorney: Jacqueline M. James (“Jackie James”) of The James Law Firm, PPLC

              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00187)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00188)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00189)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00190)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00195)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00203)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00213)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00219)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00220)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00221)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00223)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00224)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00225)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00227)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00229)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00230)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00232)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00233)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00249)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00250)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00251)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00252)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00253)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00254)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00256)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00257)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00258)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00259)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00271)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00272)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00273)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00274)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00275)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00276)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00277)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00278)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00279)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 3:17-cv-00280)

              Cases Filed in the Illinois Northern District Court (12)
              Attorney: Mary K. Schulz of the Media Litigation Firm, P.C.

              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 208.59.138.51 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01183)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 24.14.89.147 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01190)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 50.172.197.139 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01195)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 67.175.128.50 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01196)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 73.168.198.228 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01197)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 73.74.242.152 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01200)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 75.27.62.75 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01201)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 75.28.181.87 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01202)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 76.231.75.139 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01206)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 98.206.219.205 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01210)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 98.227.75.40 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01396)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, subscriber assigned IP address96.95.112.34 (Case No. 1:17-cv-01209)

              Cases Filed in the Maryland District Court (7)
              Attorney: Jon Alexander Hoppe (“Jon Hoppe”) of the Law Office of Jon a Hoppe, Esquire

              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:17-cv-00397)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:17-cv-00396)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00402)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:17-cv-00401)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00398)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00399)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 8:17-cv-00400)

              Cases Filed in the Michigan Eastern District Court (16)
              Attorney: Joel A. Bernier of Sheikh Legal Services PLLC
              176 S. Main St., Suite 1, Mount Clemens, MI 48043 ([email protected])

              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. John Doe (Case No. 2:17-cv-10422)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP ) Address 107.4.109.143 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10426)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP ) Address 107.4.109.143 (Case No. 5:17-cv-10426)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.32.2.28 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10432)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.49.201.228 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10442)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.49.243.199 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10443)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.49.243.199 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10445)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.55.89.28 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10444)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.55.89.28 (Case No. 4:17-cv-10444)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.56.223.52 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10446)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.56.223.52 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10447)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.60.174.21 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10448)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 98.209.250.195 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10449)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 98.224.223.170 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10450)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LCC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 99.37.173.71 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10451)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.40.27.99 (Case No. 2:17-cv-10441)

              Cases Filed in the New Jersey District Court (38)
              Attorney: Patrick Joseph Cerillo (“Pat Cerillo”)

              MALIBU MEDIA , LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 24.0.207.93 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01239)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01246)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01251)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.1.206.172 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01172)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.167.50 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01185)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.5.52.134 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01182)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.53.147.136 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01183)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 108.53.252.54 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01193)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.3.124.255 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01228)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.3.54.44 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01232)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.63.249.136 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01233)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.70.197.251 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01234)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 173.70.93.127 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01236)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 67.82.37.90 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01252)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 67.83.64.114 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01271)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 67.83.77.86 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01272)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.117.66.98 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01261)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.118.248.215 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01273)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.122.18.0 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01275)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.141.237.206 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01262)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.82.239.77 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01265)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 72.88.211.121 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01279)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.10.138.235 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01266)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address 73.199.240.186 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01229)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address 96.248.95.37 (Case No. 3:17-cv-01268)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER IP ADDRESS 108.35.167.198 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01180)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER IP ADDRESS 108.53.193.228 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01188)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE, SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 100.8.116.23 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01179)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01237)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01240)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 69.124.120.156 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01276)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 71.172.15.229 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01277)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.160.218.175 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01307)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.194.168.244 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01310)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.197.106.118 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01315)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 73.248.226.136 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01317)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 76.116.108.250 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01319)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC. v. JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 96.57.99.138 (Case No. 2:17-cv-01321)

              Cases Filed in the New York Eastern District Court (10)
              Attorney: Jacqueline M. James (“Jackie James”) of The James Law Firm, PPLC

              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01079)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01078)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01084)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01077)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01083)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01076)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01081)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01080)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01075)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-01082)

              Cases Filed in the New York Southern District Court (30)
              Attorney: Jacqueline M. James (“Jackie James”) of The James Law Firm, PPLC

              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00983)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00985)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00987)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00988)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00989)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00992)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00994)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00995)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01065)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01067)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01068)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01069)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01070)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01072)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01074)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01075)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01076)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01078)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01088)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01094)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01095)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01096)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01097)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01098)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01099)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01100)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01101)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-01102)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 7:17-cv-00981)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 7:17-cv-00982)

              Cases Filed in the Pennsylvania Eastern District Court (8)
              Attorney: A. Jordan Rushie (“Jordan Rushie”) of Flynn Wirkus Young PC / Rushie Law

              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-00662)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-00509)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-00506)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-00510)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-00508)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-00507)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-00512)
              MALIBU MEDIA, LLC v. JOHN DOE (Case No. 2:17-cv-00511)

              Cases Filed in the Texas Southern District Court (42)
              Attorney: Andrew Darshan Kumar (“Andrew Kumar”) and Michael J. Lowenberg (“Mike Lowenberg”) of the Lowenberg Law Firm

              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00413)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00415)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00417)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00418)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00420)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00421)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00422)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00423)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00424)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00425)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00465)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00466)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00468)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00469)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00470)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00471)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00472)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00473)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00474)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00475)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00476)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00477)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00478)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00479)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00480)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00481)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00482)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00483)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00484)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00485)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00486)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00487)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00488)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00489)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00490)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00491)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00492)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00493)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00494)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00495)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 4:17-cv-00497)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. DOE (Case No. 4:17-cv-00498)

              Cases Filed in the Virginia Eastern District Court (3)
              Attorney: John Carlin Decker, II (“John Decker”) of the Law Office of John C. Decker II
              5207 Dalby Lane, Burke, VA 22015 (John is still using his Verizon e-mail when he files the lawsuits — [email protected])

              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00192)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00193)
              Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe (Case No. 1:17-cv-00194)

               

              What else can you tell me about the Malibu Media cases?

              [2017 UPDATE] The best way to learn about Malibu Media, LLC is to read what happened to them as it happened.  The list of stories below (in the order I listed them) tell the Malibu Media story in a way that you will understand them.


              FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT MALIBU MEDIA, LLC:Again, if you have been implicated as a John Doe defendant in a Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, there are TWO (2) main articles you should read immediately:

              1) “Everything You Need To Know in One Page About Your Malibu Media, LLC (X-Art) Lawsuit [FAQ],” and then
              2) “In-Depth Malibu Media.  Their Lawsuits, Their Strategies, and Their Settlements.”

              FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT WITH AN ATTORNEY: To set up a free consultation to speak to an attorney about your Malibu Media, LLC lawsuit, click here.  Lastly, please feel free to e-mail me at info[at] cashmanlawfirm.com, or call 713-364-3476 to speak to me now about your case (I do prefer you read the articles first), or to get your questions answered.

              CONTACT FORM: Alternatively, sometimes people just like to contact me using one of these forms.  If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

                NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything “incriminating” about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

                Book a Phone Consultation with a Cashman Law Firm Attorney

                Skip to content