Court's Order re: Plaintiff's Motion to Consilidate Cases


A new document was added to Pacer today. It is the order denying Plaintiff’s, Doc’s Dream LLC, motion to consolidate cases. You can view this if you have a pacer account, otherwise it will likely be made available at justia.com soon.



This order proves what I had cited in this blog: the plaintiff and their lawyers were sorely mistaken at best, or they were trying to deceive the judge, at worst.



If you aren’t aware of the case, I’ll quickly summarize: Plaintiff, Patrick Robinson, spiked the ball after receiving the appellate court’s order. In the order, the appellate made clear that it was reversing the district court’s decision to dismiss defendant’s, Dolores Press and Melissa Scott, counterclaim as well as their complaints of copyright infringement. Robinson, along with many cheerleaders in the alt fan Gene Scott forum, insisted that the appellate partially reversed their defeat and remanded their case for trial. I posted these details in this blog, see below. The parties in the google group were incensed that I would say that they were wrong about the court’s order.



This order confirms my assertion. The appellate made clear that Robinson’s case resulted in his defeat, Scott’s case are the only ones proceeding. Robinson et al. did have one thing right; they will be allowed to argue limited abandonment/naked license in their defense of copyright infringement.



This is bad for Robinson and his group. This information comes 2 months after the court’s order, issued March 15, 2019. That means Robinson has wasted 2 months that he could have been preparing his defense. Instead he’s been wasting his time thinking he was on offense. Once again, I say; Robinson is dancing in the end zone, alone, without the ball and the scoreboard still shows 7-0 Dolores/Scott.



This goes out to the ones who so arrogantly and cruelly called me names, insulted, and attacked me: they believe everyone is an enemy, and they attack with vitriol. They dislike me commenting about this case and rail accusations against me. I explain myself, yet they attack still. Why are they so certain that everyone is an enemy? I stated my opinion, just because they did not like it, they attack me. I tried to warn them about their folly. Yet they still make me an enemy. But I repeat and maybe they will listen this time, I distrust Robinson’s call for money.



In conclusion: Robinson was calling for money, in his FUMS #39, I believe he may have been teetering on committing fraud. On the other hand, he may have been completely honest, believing everything his lawyers said to him. If that is the case, I’d question the lawyer’s motives. Why would they file a completely frivolous motion that’s bound to lose? Could they have been ignorant of the appellate order? It’s possible, but that tells me that they may not be very experienced in the field in which they practice. Or they may be carefully treading on the line between legal and illegal activity. I distrust Robinson’s call for money; whether it’s going to a fraudulent plaintiff telling his followers that he won a case that he lost, or to attorneys who are telling their client that he won a case that he lost. Either way, this is not a cause worthy of donations.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is Patrick Robinson Going to Free Up Dr. Gene Scott's Copyrights?

Will an effective defense by Patrick Robinson in a copyright infringement case “free up the copyrights” of Dr. Gene Scott’s works? Read on to find out the answer. I’ve been watching this battle play out with concern, as should anyone with an interest in copyright law, whether they be a small-time production or even Walt Disney Company. The claims being made, and defenses raised in this complicated issue of copyright infringement and claims of copyright abandonment could have a wide range of effects on copyright law. But are any of them favorable to Patrick Robinson’s group? This case has gone up and down the proverbial field of play, from the initial copyright infringement cases being dismissed to the abandonment theory being defeated in cross-motions for summary judgment. You may be asking, what is a motion for summary judgment, let alone a cross-motion? It’s not that difficult to understand and I’ll walk you through it if you’ll read on. On one side of the playi...
Read more

Patrick Robinson Gives an Update in His FUMS #41

In his FUMS #41 video Patrick Robinson gives another victory update. But is this an accurate report? It is correct that the court did rule on the motion for consolidation. This was a motion brought by Dolores/Scott and opposed by Robinson. Therefore, I cannot comprehend Robinson’s update. In the video, Robinson says a few things that are inaccurate: 1) The cases are being consolidated under his first case. 2) Robinson acts like this consolidation is a victory for his group. 3) The undisputed fact that “It is undisputed that Dr. Gene Scott permitted downloads and encouraged the sharing and distribution of his teachings.” The first point is false. The cases are being assigned under Dolores Press’ first filed case, as evidenced by the court’s order Granting Dolores Press’ Motion for Consolidation, document 164 filed on 08/13/2019 page 4 of 4, wherein the Judge ordered the cases be consolidated under: Dolores Press Inc. v Patrick Robinson, et al. 2:15-cv-02562-R-PLA. Furthe...
Read more

Did Anthony Todd Testify Against Himself?

Is it possible to testify against yourself in a trial in which you did not appear? Anthony Todd may find out soon enough. On Friday, September 27, 2019 Melissa Scott’s attorneys filed a Motion for Reconsideration regarding the denied injunction against Todd. In Scott’s proposed judgment it was requested that Todd be enjoined from further infringement, and among other things, for Todd to preserve every file of Dr. Scott’s works. Judge Klausner denied the injunction reasoning that Scott had not proven that Todd was likely to continue to infringe. He further denied the preservation of all files because that was not what the complaint requested. In Friday’s moving papers, Scott’s attorneys request the Judge reconsider his previous orders and issue the injunction. The documents contain screenshots of Posts by Todd wherein he is conversing with other people online in google groups and Facebook. In these posts Todd promises Scott that he will not stop sharing the files...
Read more