Xcentric Ventures, LLC, et al., v. Richeson

Filing 25

NOTICE re LODGING FORM OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION by Jaburg & Wilk, P.C., Xcentric Ventures LLC. (Speth, Maria)

Xcentric Ventures, LLC, et al., v. Richeson

Doc. 25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Jaburg & Wilk, P.C. Attorneys At Law 3200 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2000 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 [phone]

Maria Crimi Speth (012574) JABURG & WILK, P.C. 3200 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2000 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 [e-mail] [phone] David S. Gingras (021097) Gingras Law Office, PLLC 4072 E Mountain Vista Dr. Phoenix, AZ 85048 Tel.: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA XCENTRIC VENTURES, LLC, an Arizona limited liability corporation, and JABURG & WILK, P.C., a professional corporation, Plaintiffs, v. SHAWN RICHESON, Defendant. Pursuant to the Court's September 21, 2010 minute entry (Document 21), Plaintiffs Xcentric Ventures, LLC and Jaburg & Wilk, P.C. give notice of lodging the attached proposed form of preliminary injunction. DATED this 28th day of September, 2010. JABURG & WILK, P.C. Case No.: 2:10-cv-01931-PHX-NVW NOTICE OF LODGING FORM OF PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

s/Maria Crimi Speth Maria Crimi Speth David S. Gingras Attorneys for Plaintiffs
10297-73/MCS/MCS/831353_v1

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Jaburg & Wilk, P.C. Attorneys At Law 3200 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2000 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 [phone]

Certificate of Service I hereby certify that on the 28th day of September, 2010, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing. I have also caused to be delivered to Defendant, who is not registered with the CM/ECF System, a copy of the attached document by First Class Mail and E-Mail: Shawn Richeson 1906 Twilight Drive Killeen, Texas 76543 [e-mail] Defendant Pro Per

s/Debra Gower

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
10297-73/MCS/MCS/831353_v1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (2) v. SHAWN RICHESON, Defendant. Before this Court is the Application of Plaintiffs Xcentric Ventures, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company ("Xcentric") and Jaburg & Wilk, P.C. ("Jaburg & Wilk"), an Arizona professional corporation, for the entry of a Preliminary Injunction. The Court having considered the Application and pleadings on file with the Court, and being otherwise advised, FINDS that: (1) Defendant Shawn Richeson has engaged in harassment and threats against Plaintiffs; Defendant Shawn Richeson has engaged in harassment and threats against Plaintiffs' business associates, clients, and potential clients, and, specifically, having threatened that if Xcentric did not remove or redact certain information from the Ripoff Report website, he would put Jaburg & Wilk out of business;
10297-73/MCS/MCS/831348_v1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA XCENTRIC VENTURES, LLC, an Arizona limited liability corporation, and JABURG & WILK, P.C., a professional corporation, Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:10-cv-01931-NVW PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

(3)

Defendant Shawn Richeson has also threatened harm to Jaburg & Wilk's relationship with its clients other than Xcentric;

(4)

Defendant Shawn Richeson has engaged in harassment and threats against Plaintiffs, and, specifically, having threatened that Plaintiffs would end up having to engage in an expensive "SEO war";

(5)

Defendant Shawn Richeson has authored and published false and defamatory statements on multiple public websites about Jaburg & Wilk, falsely implying that (a) it hires child molesters as attorneys; (b) it owns the Ripoff Report website, and (c) it is unethical because it is the owner of the Ripoff Report website;

(6)

Defendant Shawn Richeson has engaged in a pattern of unlawful activity by engaging in two or more acts of extortion;

(7)

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-1809(E), there is reasonable evidence of harassment of the Plaintiffs by Defendant Richeson;

(8) (9)

Absent a court order, this conduct will continue; There is a strong likelihood of success on the merits;

(10) There is a likelihood of irreparable injury to Plaintiffs if this Order is not entered; (11) A balance of hardships strongly favors Plaintiffs; and (12) Public policy favors the injunction. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Preliminary Injunction is GRANTED and Defendant Richeson and his agents, servants, employees, and other persons who are in active concert or participation with them are temporarily enjoined from: (1) Knowingly sending or causing to be sent to either Plaintiff any communication that contains threats of violence, threats to perform criminal acts, threats to harm either Plaintiff's business by tortious or unlawful means, or threats to harm either Plaintiff's reputation by tortious or unlawful means; 2
10297-73/MCS/MCS/831348_v1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

(2)

Knowingly sending or causing to be sent to any individual or entity that Richeson knows is an existing client of a Plaintiff any communication that contains threats of violence, threats to perform criminal acts, threats to harm its business by tortious or unlawful means, or threats to harm its reputation by tortious or unlawful means;

(3)

Knowingly publishing or disseminating or causing to be published or disseminated any false and defamatory communication about either Plaintiff or anyone who Richeson knows to be a client of either Plaintiff;

(4)

Taking wrongful or unlawful actions that are intended to cause damage to the relationship between Plaintiffs and their existing clients;

(5)

Engaging in conduct that constitutes harassment of either Plaintiff, as that term is defined in A.R.S. § 12-1809(E), which is a series of acts over any period of time that is directed to either Plaintiff and that would cause a reasonable person to be seriously alarmed, annoyed or harassed and the conduct in fact seriously alarms, annoys or harasses the person and serves no legitimate purpose.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Richeson shall take affirmative steps to ensure that his agents, servants, employees, and other persons who are in active concert or participation with them receive a copy of this preliminary injunction. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Richeson shall not delete or destroy any evidence, including but not limited to computer reproduced or saved data or any other form of evidence pertaining to Xcentric, Jaburg & Wilk, or any of their employees or associates. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the previously posted bond shall remain in effect pursuant to Rule 65(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. DATED:

3
10297-73/MCS/MCS/831348_v1