There have been 9 new docket entries in the Stebbins v. Doe SidAlpha lawsuit with Acerthorn.
On March 4th Acerthorn's neglected to submit his third attempt at an issuance of subpoena. This was a huge mistake. The case was at risk of being dismissed without it.
Docket 27 On March 11th the Court wrote a "REQUEST FOR REASSIGNMENT TO DISTRICT JUDGE AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE"
On February 12, 2024, the court denied
Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration and ordered Plaintiff to file his
third motion for early discovery by March 4, 2024. [Docket No. 26.] No further motions have
been filed by Plaintiff.
Accordingly, the court recommends that Plaintiff’s action be dismissed without prejudice
for failure to prosecute. The Clerk is directed to reassign this case to a district judge. Any party
may file objections to this report and recommendation with the district judge within 14 days after
being served with a copy.
Docket 28 Acerthorn asks for more time to file his "Third Motion for Issuance of Subpoena Duces." He said he thought it was due March 14th.
Docket 29 Acerthorn submits the late 20 page motion for issuance of subpoena.
My favorite parts
21. This Court says that I “cannot rely on a defendant’s relationships with third parties
headquartered in California to establish that the defendant directed its intentional acts towards
the forum state?” Well, unambiguous binding precedent from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
says ... oh yes I can!
22. And please, don't gaslight me by saying that Mavrix is distinguishable/inapposite because
of this reason or that.
Acerthorn gives the Court more ammo to dismiss his case.
74. But at least this time, because I now know [SidAlpha's] address, at least now, I know exactly which
Court I need to re-file in, so I am not effectively deprived of my right to my day in Court in its
entirety simply due to the most ridiculous of technicalities
Docket 30 Acerthorn filed a motion for recusal, alleging the judge was biased against him.
7. At this point, even if Judge Ryu is forced to accept, begrudgedly, that jurisdiction is
proper in this Court, she would, in all likelihood, still actively search for some excuse ... any
excuse ... she could find to throw the case out on the merits, even if that requires she actively
ignore binding precedent, actively ignore black letter law, actively ignore arguments I present,
and actively choose to make determinations regarding witness credibility at stages where it is
utterly inappropriate to do so (such as on a motion for summary judgment, or even on a motion
to dismiss).
8. In short, recusal is the only way to ensure I will get a fair trial.
9. For this reason, I ask Judge Ryu to recuse herself and hand the case off to another
magistrate judge.
Docket 31 Acerthorn motions for an extension to object to the judges Report and Recommendation (Docket 27)
4. Because there is a very high probability that the delay was the result of honest mistake
and excusable neglect, there is likewise a very high probability that the relief requested in Dkt.
28 will be granted.
5. If it is granted, then the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation will become null
and void, and the case will be reassigned back to her to adjudicate both Dkts. 29 & 30.
Therefore, I will not be required to submit objections to the Report and Recommendation at that
point.
6. Due to the very high possibility that my objections to this Report & Recommendation
will become unnecessary, I hereby request that the time for me to submit my objections be stayed
indefinitely.
Docket 32 Acerthorn submits a supplemental brief containing supporting exhibits for his late subpoena
Exhibit A shows his channel analytics that says 4% of Acerthorn's viewers are Californian. Acerthorn extrapolates that 4% of SidAlpha's audience might also be Californian and so he should be able to sue SidAlpha in California.
Exhibit B is a screenshot of Youporn.com which says access is disabled in the State of Arkansas.
Docket 33 the Court reassigns the case to Judge Chesney
Docket 34 Court denies motion for recusal. Refers the motions for time extension to the previous Judge. Grants Docket 31's “Motion for Extension of Time to Submit Objections to Report and Recommendation”
Docket 35 Acerthorn's "Motions for reconsideration in response to order denying motion to recuse"
Cries that the Judge is biased again.
Docket 36 Court denies Docket 35 because "[n]o motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration may repeat any oral or written argument made by the applying party in support of or in opposition to the interlocutory order which the party now seeks to have reconsidered"
This lawsuit hasn't even got off the ground. Acerthorn has spent more than a year arguing with the court about jurisdiction. This wouldn't have been a problem if he filed where he or SidAlpha lives. Acerthorn has filed lawsuits in Arkansas, Florida, Washington, Virginia, and Missouri. I don't understand why he's wasting so much time and effort trying to sue in the wrong district.
