Skitzocow David Anthony Stebbins / Acerthorn / stebbinsd / fayettevillesdavid - Litigious autist, obese livestreamer, elder abuser, violent schizo, ladyboy importer, hot dog enjoyer, wereturkey.

[Dollar Store Sentai]

Considering Sid is in Jail for 6 months due to a DUI, it will be very difficult for him to respond to anything.

Stabby believes the Sidney Redfield that Spokeo people search found in Idaho is the same person as SidAlpha.

He found a tradmark in Idaho that lapsed in 2018 for SidAlpha registered to Sidney Redfield

 

[CabbageTheSnackThatSlaps]

Why Idaho? isn't he car-less?

Supposedly from emails I've seen, he does have a car. I don't think I'm at liberty to share these emails.

 

[WarJams]

Let the gobbling commence. They're coming for his hot dog money.

View attachment 7467033

​

 

[MongolianMongoose]

Why Idaho? isn't he car-less?

Supposedly from emails I've seen, he does have a car. I don't think I'm at liberty to share these emails.

He said on Reddit he has a 2002 PT Cruiser.
/r/askcarguys/
/r/MechanicAdvice
He deleted the posts but they originally said

I just tried to put some coolant in my car. As soon as I unscrewed the top, I dropped it inside the front of the car. I tried backing up the car just slightly in the hopes that I would uncover the cap, but it didn't work, so the cap must be stuck inside the pipes.
Temporarily, can I get by just by putting duct tape on it? At least until either (A) I can get a replacement cap in the mail, or (B) it falls out, whichever occurs first?
If not, then what do you guys recommend I use as an interim fix?
EDIT: For what it's worth, I'm driving a 2002 Chrysler PT Cruiser

 

[DavidS877]

In Stabby v Doe/Ceetosis he's asking for a stay pending the approval of his interlocutory appeal in Stabby v Alphabet(also Creetosis) where they smacked him down today earlier.
Stabby v Doe/Creetosis 26

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/70393277/26/stebbins-v-doe/

Pweeze, let me appeal....
Stabby v Alphabet 85

Spoiler: 3 pages

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/62635218/85/stebbins-v-alphabet-inc/

Court then says, "Um, Stabby, we need to schedule a hearing on the proper date." (I think)

So, Stabby does that.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/62635218/87/stebbins-v-alphabet-inc/

And now you know.

 

[Sweeter and Savoury]

welp that was a slog to read, Stabby's usual high standards seems to be missing here.

Basicly Stabby's still beating the dead horse that just because ALL of his content was used, every last single second of it, to quote the greasy lard-bucket nothing can justify fair use. It's a "complete market replacement" of his content and nothing else can sway that opinion dammit!

"it's plain to see that Creetosis's video serves as a 100% copy of my work and thus must be assessed as a full market replacement and so simply cannot be in any way found as Fair Use"

It's the same shit as always. I guess getting smacked down on every other Fair Use test Stabby is now insisting that because someone who watches Creetosis's video gets the fully Stabby experience nothing the judge said in his fair use tests was correct. Once again Stabby knows the laws better then any mere judge or magistrate of course.

Even though the Owl Fucker and friends spent like 6 hours talking over Stabby's little 20 min video (seriously do these people not have lives?) it doesn't count as fair use...like anyone would spend 6 hours listening to these furfags yap about the dumbest shit just so they can free ride their way to that sweet sweet high quality David Stebbins khantent for free.

TLDR: David big mad, judge hates him and is way wrong as anyone with a brain can clearly see that.

Yah our man's a full autistic alright, nothing can get him to change is mind about anything. He's right and we're all wrong and that's that.

 

[DavidS877]

View attachment 7718287​

I'm pretty sure he's denied electronic filing in this case so as it's after 5PM California time there does not appear to be an entry on the docket for the response. I guess since they go by postmarks then he may still have a couple days for it to arrive.

 

[MongolianMongoose]

Checked in on his activity on the legal help website Avvo.
51) 2025/03/02 When does the 90 day time limit to file a petition with SCOTUS begin?
52) 2025/04/28 Where in the federal statute does it say that on-call time is compensable?
53) 2025/06/12 What's the branch of equity called where a court changes the terms of a contract?
54) 2025/07/16 Which state has jurisdiction in an interstate clandestine phone recording case?
55) 2025/07/22 Can the subpoena power under 17 USC § 512(h) be used to find the identity of a false claimer under § 512(f)?

This is a follow up to the list of 50 other questions he asked there

Surprise! Avvo, the anonymous legal help website, isn't anonymous. Literally. I don't know why I thought it was. It's actually very easy to find all of Acerthorn's post if you know where to look.

 

[Sweeter and Savoury]

those are some...pretty interesting questions he's asking.

Is Stabby worried about something?

 

[DavidS877]

I'm pretty sure he's denied electronic filing in this case so as it's after 5PM California time there does not appear to be an entry on the docket for the response. I guess since they go by postmarks then he may still have a couple days for it to arrive.

I may be wrong on this. In Utah, where the Greee case is happening the court explicitly states in their Local Rules that when a document arrives is when it arrives, so there's no "Postmark" exception. I can't find information either way for C.D. California. Many Googles turn up the "Mailbox Rule" but that appears to be for the IRS.

In any case, no filing showing up in PACER this morning yet.