Ward v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 25

RESPONSE in Opposition re 24 MOTION for Leave to Supplement the Record Regarding It's Pending Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue, or in the Alternative, Motion to Transfer Venue filed by John Ward, Jr. (Attachments: # 1 Ex. 1, # 2 Ex. 2, # 3 Ex. 3, # 4 Ex. 4, # 5 Ex. 5, # 6 Ex. 6)(Patton, Nicholas)

Download PDF
The Prior Art: ScottHarris' lawyersdrop Troll Tmckerdepositiondemand;Frenkel,Cisc... Page1of2 The Prior Art One reporter's notes on the IP bat Mayo7,2oo8 Scott Harris' lawyers ilrop Troll Ttacker deposition demand; Frenkel, Cisco say subpoena was meant to assist Texas lar,l'yers'defamation attack Part One:ScottHarais'lawyersgive up their effolt todayto depose latert Troll TEcker bloggerRick Elen\c!. Harris'lawye$ at Niro ScavoreHaller & Nirc (NSHN)had saidthey suspected Frenkelwasworking vrith opposing finn Fish & Richardson, law which is lockedin litigation with irs former top-billing lawyerand Niro Scavone client ScottC. Harris. Ciscoand Frenkel,in tum, claimedthat Nirc la\ayeNwereusingan overly-broad subpoena a back-doorroute to uncorr'ering as evidence that couldbe usedin the Arkansasand TexaspedrC defclq4ia4 larlsu{s againstFrenkeland his employer. Therewasno secretalliancebetweenFish & Richardson and Frenkellmther. it v,as the Niro Scavon firm that could be sneakib helpingJohnnyWard Jr. and Eric Albritton get more ammunition for their lawsuits,allegeFrenkelhis employer. Harris' lavryers they $ve up on this depositionbecause say Frenkel$ircre in his deposition that he had "no communication with anybodyat Fish & Richardson concerningthe underlyiDg litigation and the relatedpaties." That cancels May 13hearint that was the scheduled SauJosewhereHarris' lawyerswould havefacedoff with attorneys in representing Ciscoand Flenkel. From FreDkl's briefopposingdeposition("Movants.heremeansScottHarris & Co.): The subpoena of couNe,much broaderand seeks is, wide ranginginformation about the PatentTroll Tracker.Furthennor,we are informed andbelievethat the di,scovery the chicagocasehas in put Movaotson noticethat FreDkel,consistent with his declaratiouin this matter, had no involvementwith the Fishfirm whatsoever regardingthe chicagocase. invite Movantsto contradictour informedbelief w with evidence. what the court is left $'ith is that Frnkelwrote mattersdispleasing Movantsa,'d their counsel to or1ttre Prr. For thi-sthey haveattemptedto createan excuse take his deposition.The subpoena to rai.es not only i.suesof harassment abuse, alsothe rigbt of spakers publishtheir viewsfree of legallyimposed and but to inquiry from and by the subjectsof the articleswhen,as non-partie6, they haveno connection the to underlyinglitigation. Thetestimonysoughtmay haverclevance tr Arka*as and rexas litigatio[, TheArkansasanalTexas to litigation involveclaimsthat Frcnkel publisheddefamatory commentson the ptr. Because portionsof tle di.scoversoughthaveno apparentrelevance the chicagocasebut mayhaverelevance the Arl..ansas f' to to anal Texas litigation, Frenkelfearsthat Movants'true motivationfor issuingthe subpoena seeking compel and to discovery to circumventtle discovery is ordersof the Arl..ansas Texascourts.such conaruct a clear and is abuse power. ofthe subpoena In its motion to quash,CiscoStsten$ makessimilat argurnents. companypoints out that not only did Ray The Niro put out a g15,000(unclaimed)bounty to unmaskFrenkel,but that whenNirc wasa gueston thq Intemet mdio orogram"LawJrer 2ld!rycd on March 27,he gavea frierdly shout-outto the Texaslar,yersbehindtle defamationsuits,saying"I know Johnny Ward very well and I know Eric [Alb fton] too,,, hhp:/theprioran.typepad.corn/the prior_art12008/05/scon-harris-Ia.hrnI '7 /6/2008 The Pdor Arf; ScottHarris' lawyeN drop Troll Trackerdepositiondemand; Frenkel,Cisc,.. page2of2 FmmCisco's Motiotr Quash: to Frenkel's PatentTroll Trackeris a popularwebsitethat prcvidesintercsting,timely, and impoltant iDfolnmtionto the patent commudityand othe$. As the name\arould suggest, point ofview wassometimes its critical of shell corporationsestablished solelyfor the purposeof filiog patentlit8ation (colloquiallyknolr'n as"patenttrolls") and thus, a counterpointto Hanis'website and Niro,swdtten articleswhich generally extolledthe virtue. A posting oDOctober18,2oo7 ofthe patentTroll TBcker hasisulteil in ilefamation littatio[ itr separate fedeml courtsitr ArkansasCfexa*alla) and TexasClyler) bmught by two attomeys(not Niro or his fiIm). Thefollowing depositionTopicsfron the subpoena might har,erelevance the Texas/Arkansas but to suit v,ouldseemto havenothing to do with the claimsald defenses tle Chicago of case: for s. Factualbases PatentTroll Tracler blog articlesidentified in Exlibits A to C. 6. Investigative matedals,sources and procedure patentTroll rracker blog articlesidentifiedin for, for ExhibitsA to C. 7.All PatentTrcll Trackerblog ntriesconcerning ScoftHarris, Raymondp, Niro, NSHN,JamesB. parker, Courtney Sherrer,or the rcle\,?tl lawsuit. 8. Theorigin and history of the patentTroll Trackerblog. on 9. the decisions subjects,includingbut not limited to ScottHaris, Raymondp. Niro, NSHN,JamesB. Parker,CourtneyShenr, addressed the patentTroll Trackerblos. in "Ha!ris'website" presumably refereuce theremarlqbly is a to nameil, recently and revived, vl{.{,ilsapaletrttlsltests, I'll cootinue storyoverth nexttrro several this Dosts. Otherposts thisseries: in . PartTta,o: Tlackerspeaks, vowsto retum Troll and . PartThree: thepatetrt Ir Ttoll Tlacke!a reporter? . PartFour:PateitTrollTrackr theReporte!,s privilege. and Posted o7:S8 in Case: at PM ScottHaris v. Fish& &ebA!d6s& eS!0palE_ei,rlssaltems, Firm:Fi.6h & Iat{ Richardson. [irE: NiraSeayoae, law lefctfTrSll]laeLqr, patc[ts I pcxqallrrt TrackBack Tracklack URI for tbis entry: http://wvrw.typpad.com/t/|ifackack/27o2r22 2887636 .}, I 4 Listedbelowarelinks to weblogs that referetrce Eubpona meant assist war to Texas lawvers' defrmation attack: CoDnrents The conmentsto this etrtry are closed. http:i/thepriorat.typepad.com/thejrior_artl2008/05/scott_hanisla.html '1t6D008

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?