Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

jamesmarinejpg-2529899_p9

IN A STUNNING VICTORY THAT HAS BEEN PREDICTED NOW FOR THE PAST EIGHTEEN MONTHS BY THE MCGIBNEY GANG, JAMES MCGIBNEY (WHO WE DON’T LIKE) HAS WON HIS FEDERAL LAWSUIT AND HAS BEATEN ALL THE INTERNET BULLIES AND SHOWN THEM WHO IS THE BOSS, AS ONLY A PERSON WHO IS A BOSS CAN WIN IN FEDERAL COURT.  AM I RIGHT?  Oh, wait… no we’re not.


Special UpdateSPECIAL UPDATE AT BOTTOM OF ARTICLE! 


 

U.S. District Court Judge Beth Labson Freeman, Northern District of California

U.S. District Court Judge Beth Labson Freeman, Northern District of California

 

This is a time when our mere words are not enough to express what has happened here for you and for all of us.  So we shall step back from the keyboard for a bit and just let US District Court Judge Beth Freeman speak and y’all can let the joy fill your body upon the reading of each and every sentence contained below.

 

THESE HERE ARE THE MEN WHO – ALONG WITH THE HELP OF MANY OTHER PEOPLE, BEAT THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF JAMES MCGIBNEY – 100% VERIFIED.

Jeff Dorrell

Jeff Dorrell

Thomas Retzlaff

Thomas Retzlaff

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some highlights from Judge Freeman are:

As an initial matter, the Court observes that Plaintiffs alleged a substantial number of new facts in their SAC, including events that occurred after the filing of this lawsuit. While ostensibly framed as “jurisdictional,” these allegations in fact defy the Court’s order that Plaintiffs’ amendments be limited to allegations concerning this Court’s personal jurisdiction over Defendant.

 

 

As an initial matter, Defendant roundly denies being in personal communication with plaintiff McGibney and moreover denies all of the misconduct that Plaintiffs attribute to him, including knowledge of ViaView’s advertising partners and the location of ViaView’s former celebrity endorsers.

Mr. McGibney’s declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ opposition brief provides no competent evidence to refute Defendant’s declaration. For example, McGibney declares that he can testify “on personal knowledge” that “[Defendant] knew that [McGibney’s] resident and domicile was in San Jose, California and [Defendant] intentionally committed wrongs against [Plaintiffs] . . . knowing that we were in San Jose, California” and that Defendant is behind the various Twitter and email aliases that perpetrated the alleged misconduct.

More fundamentally, Plaintiffs provide no foundation for McGibney’s ability to testify on personal knowledge to any of these allegations concerning Defendant’s intent, knowledge, and operation of the alleged aliases. Plaintiffs cannot avoid their evidentiary burden on a factual challenge to personal jurisdiction by resting on the allegations in the SAC. Absent competent evidence, Plaintiffs failed to make a prima facie showing of jurisdictional facts sufficient to carry their burden.

As such, Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate, through affirmative proof with competent evidence beyond the pleadings, that Defendant has sufficient contacts with this forum that the exercise of specific personal jurisdiction over him comports with “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.”

 

 

Check it out here =======>ECF 172 Order granting dismissal – 6-18-2015

 

 

ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_01 ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_02 ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_03

ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_04 ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_05 ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_06

ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_07

ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_08

ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_09

ECF 172 Order granting dismissal - 6-18-2015_Page_10

 

BV getting peed on

SUCKS TO BE YOU MCBITCHNEY!!

 

 

 

 

 


UPDATE:  6/19/2015 at 183- hrs GMT.

 

Well it seems that while James (“Jimmy the Piss Boy“) McGibney was getting the shit kicked out of him in federal court, across the street, at the very same moment, his Vicodin fueled lawyer Jason (Jay) Leiderman was doubling down on the stupid by asking the San Jose TRO judge, Judge Socrates Manoukian, for more unenforceable court orders, such as trying to get this case declared an Aggravated Stalking case.  el oh el.  Nice try, dummy.

In any event, here is yet another dire pronouncement / promise right out of the mouth of Jimmy the Piss Boy.

Santa Clara bench warrant

 

For some stupidly odd reason, Leiderman and McGibney seem to think that by raising the level of butt-hurt from a $500 no-show bond (that is unenforceable across state lines) to a $20,000 no-show unenforceable bond, that the laws of the State of California will some how magically change to their way of thinking.

Yet they completely failed to read the small print – yet again.  So here it is for y’all to see for yourself:

Santa Clara bench warrant #2

 

As you can see, under the terms of the law, even if our American Hero and Honorary Admin of the BV Files were to be served with this civil writ of attachment by a California Peace Officer (the only person allowed to lawfully serve such a thing), said officer could not arrest TR.  All TR would have to do is sign a citation promising to appear and he would be let go within minutes.

Even if the no-show bond were to be set to $1 million dollars, the results would still be exactly the same.  See, it is not the amount of the bond that makes it unenforceable and why the cops don’t care, it is the fact that California state law (and the US Constitution) does not allow it to be enforced across state lines.

 

Just keep spinning your wheels, Jimmy boy.  All you do is create more lulz for us!

0 0 votes
Article Rating