Woodhouse v. Meta Platforms Inc. et al
| Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. |
| Meta Platforms Inc., Alphabet Inc., Nike Inc., Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Mr. Rob Bonta, Mr. David Harris, Stanley Blumenfeld, Gary Klausner, Christina Snyder, Dean Pregerson, Lawrence Van Dyke, Eric Miller, Mark Bennett, Ms. Joanne Osinoff and Molly Dwyer |
| 1:2023cv07000 |
| August 9, 2023 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Paul A Engelmayer |
| Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 ra Fed. Question: Racketeering (RICO) Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 20, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 27
LETTER addressed to Judge Paul A. Engelmayer from Kristin A. Linsley dated October 4, 2023 re: provision of unpublished cases to Plaintiff. Document filed by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc...(Linsley, Kristin)
|
|
Filing 26
PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR DEFAULT AND REQUEST FOL JUDICIAL NOTICE. Document filed by Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. (sc)
|
|
Filing 25
REPLY to Response to Motion re: #21 MOTION for Joinder to Nike, Inc., Meta Platforms, Inc., and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP's Motion to Deem Plaintiff a Vexatious Litigant and Enter a Nationwide Anti-Filing Injunction. . Document filed by Alphabet Inc...(Candido, Amy)
|
|
Filing 24
REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: #13 MOTION for an Order to Deem Plaintiff a Vexatious Litigant and Enter a Nationwide Filing Injunction . . Document filed by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc...(Linsley, Kristin)
|
|
MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 9,10,22. Mailed to: Benjamin Woodhouse Esq. 2975 Bayview Drive Pismo Beach, CA 93449. (sha)
|
|
Filing 23
PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITIONS TO THE TRIPLE CONFLICTED PARTIES' IMPROPERLY CAPTIONED MOTION FOR AN ORDER AND ALPHABET INC.'S MOTION FOR A JOINDER & PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT FOR PLEAD FELONIES, A TRIPLE CONFLICT, VIOLATIONS, & WITNESSED TERRORIST ACTS, Re:(RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion re: #21 MOTION for Joinder to Nike, Inc., Meta Platforms, Inc., and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP's Motion to Deem Plaintiff a Vexatious Litigant and Enter a Nationwide Anti-Filing Injunction). Document filed by Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. (sc)
|
|
Filing 22
ORDER: The Court invites a response to the motion from plaintiff Woodhouse. The response is due by September 26, 2023. Any reply from defendants is due October 3, 2023. SO ORDERED., ( Responses due by 9/26/2023, Replies due by 10/3/2023.) (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 9/12/2023) (ama)
|
|
Filing 21
MOTION for Joinder to Nike, Inc., Meta Platforms, Inc., and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP's Motion to Deem Plaintiff a Vexatious Litigant and Enter a Nationwide Anti-Filing Injunction. Document filed by Alphabet Inc...(Candido, Amy)
|
|
Filing 20
RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by Alphabet Inc...(Candido, Amy)
|
|
Filing 19
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Amy H. Candido on behalf of Alphabet Inc...(Candido, Amy)
|
|
***NOTICE TO COURT REGARDING PROPOSED ORDER. Document No. #16 Proposed Order was reviewed and approved as to form. (tp)
|
|
Filing 17
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Kristin Andrea Linsley on behalf of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc...(Linsley, Kristin)
|
|
Filing 16
PROPOSED ORDER. Document filed by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc.. Related Document Number: #13 ..(Linsley, Kristin) Proposed Order to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.
|
|
Filing 15
DECLARATION of Austin Schwing in Support re: #13 MOTION for an Order to Deem Plaintiff a Vexatious Litigant and Enter a Nationwide Filing Injunction .. Document filed by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - May 24, 2023 email from Woodhouse/Havensight, #2 Exhibit B - May 20, 2023 email from Woodhouse/Havensight, #3 Exhibit C - May 20, 2023 email from Woodhouse/Havensight, #4 Exhibit D - May 22, 2023 email from Woodhouse/Havensight, #5 Exhibit E - May 22, 2023 email from Woodhouse/Havensight, #6 Exhibit F - May 25, 2023 email from Woodhouse/Havensight).(Linsley, Kristin)
|
|
Filing 14
MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: #13 MOTION for an Order to Deem Plaintiff a Vexatious Litigant and Enter a Nationwide Filing Injunction . . Document filed by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc...(Linsley, Kristin)
|
|
Filing 13
MOTION for an Order to Deem Plaintiff a Vexatious Litigant and Enter a Nationwide Filing Injunction . Document filed by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc...(Linsley, Kristin)
|
|
Filing 12
RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc...(Linsley, Kristin)
|
|
Filing 11
FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY - (SEE DOCUMENT#17) NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Kristin Andrea Linsley on behalf of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., Meta Platforms Inc., Nike Inc...(Linsley, Kristin) Modified on 9/12/2023 (lb).
|
|
Filing 18
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO AMENDED ORDER, SECOND MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION, SECOND MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL, SECOND MOTION TO RE-INSTATE THE COMPLAINT, SECOND MOTION FOR DEFAULT, & REQUEST, re: #10 Order of Dismissal. Document filed by Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. (sc)
|
|
Filing 10
AMENDED ORDER: The Comt dismisses this action sua sponte as frivolous. The Court grants Woodhouse 30 days to show cause by affirmation as to why the should not bar Woodhouse, Havensight, and any other entity that Woodhouse owns or controls from filing any future civil action in this court against any of the defendants named in this action without first obtaining the court's leave to file. An affirmation fonn is attached to this order, which Woodhouse should complete as specified. Should Woodhouse fail to submit an affirmation within the time directed, or should Woodhouse's affirmation fail to set forth good cause why the Court should not impose the abovementioned filing injunction on him, the Court will bar Woodhouse, Havensight, and any other entity that Woodhouse owns or controls from filing any future civil action in this court against any of the defendants named in this action without first obtaining the court's leave to file. Defendants need not respond to this action unless ordered by the Court. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. l 915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in form a pauper is status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 9/8/2023) (rro)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER denying #8 Motion to Disqualify Judge; denying #8 Motion for New Trial. On September 5, 2023, the Court dismissed pro se plaintiff Benjamin Woodhouse's complaint as frivolous, and ordered Woodhouse to submit an affirmation showing cause as to why the Court should not bar Woodhouse, and any other entity he owns or controls, from filing any future civil action in this court against any of the defendants named in this action without first obtaining the court's leave to file. Dkt. 7. Later the same day, Woodhouse filed a motion to disqualify the below signed and reinstate the Complaint; for a new trial, default, and judicial notice; and responding to the order to show cause. Dkt. 8. The Court denies the motion as meritless and directs the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at docket 8. Separately, today, the Court filed an amended version of its order at docket 7, to enclose the affirmation form. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 9/8/2023) (rro)
|
|
MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 7. Mailed to: Benjamin Woodhouse Esq. 2975 Bayview Drive Pismo Beach, CA 93449. (sha)
|
|
Filing 8
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION, MOTION FOR RE-INSTATEMENT OF THE COMPLAINT, MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL, MOTION FOR DEFAULT, RESPONSE TO ORDER FOR SHOW CAUSE AND REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE. Document filed by Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq.(sc)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER: The Court dismisses this action sua sponte as frivolous. The Court grants Woodhouse 30 days to show cause by affirmation as to why the Court should not bar Woodhouse, Havensight, and any other entity that Woodhouse owns or controls from filing any future civil action in this court against any of the defendants named in this action without first obtaining the court's leave to file. An affirmation form is attached to this order, which Woodhouse should complete as specified. Should Woodhouse fail to submit an affirmation within the time directed, or should Woodhouse's affirmation fail to set forth good cause why the Court should not impose the above mentioned filing injunction on him, the Court will bar Woodhouse, Havensight, and any other entity that Woodhouse owns or controls from filing any future civil action in this court against any of the defendants named in this action without first obtaining the court's leave to file. Defendants need not respond to this action unless ordered by the Court. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 9/5/2023) (tg)
|
|
Filing 6
PLAINTIFF'S PROOF OF SERVICE OF COMPLAINT & CASE INITIATING DOCUMENTS; served on Meta Platforms Inc., CSC Lawyers Incorporating Service; Alphabet Inc., CSC Lawyers Incorp. Service; United Agents Group Inc.; AAA Attorney Services II, Inc. Document filed by Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. (sc)
|
|
Filing 5
SUMMONS ISSUED as to Alphabet Inc., Mark Bennett, Stanley Blumenfeld, Rob Bonta, Molly Dwyer, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., David Harris, Gary Klausner, Meta Platforms Inc., Eric Miller, Nike Inc., Joanne Osinoff, Dean Pregerson, Christina Snyder, Lawrence Van Dyke. (ta)
|
|
Mailed a copy of #5 Summons Issued, to Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. 2975 Bayview Drive Pismo Beach, CA 93449. (ta)
|
|
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (dsh)
|
|
NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT to Judge Paul A. Engelmayer. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case..(dsh)
|
|
Pro Se Payment of Fee Processed: Credit Card processed in the amount of $402.00 by the Finance Department on 08/14/2023, Receipt Number 439. (lal)
|
|
Filing 4
REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Alphabet Inc., Mark Bennett, Stanley Blumenfeld, Rob Bonta, Molly Dwyer, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., David Harris, Gary Klausner, Meta Platforms Inc., Eric Miller, Nike Inc., Joanne Osinoff, Dean Pregerson, Christina Snyder, Lawrence Van Dyke, re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. (sac)
|
|
Filing 3
CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. (sac)
|
|
Filing 2
CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (sac)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Alphabet Inc., Mark Bennett, Stanley Blumenfeld, Rob Bonta, Molly Dwyer, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Inc., David Harris, Gary Klausner, Meta Platforms Inc., Eric Miller, Nike Inc., Joanne Osinoff, Dean Pregerson, Christina Snyder, Lawrence Van Dyke. Document filed by Benjamin Woodhouse, Esq. (sac)
|
|
Case Designated ECF. (sac)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
