The efforts of Regan Benson’s Helping Hands for Dignity 501(c)(3) organization to sue Anthony “BlackHartKnight” Gurka may have hit a snag on Tuesday as Judge William H. Orrick questioned if he had jurisdiction over the lawsuit at the case management conference.
Benson’s organization is suing Gurka for allegedly using her YouTube videos without her permission and the alleged misrepresentation of copyright claims made in the DCMA counter notification process.
Randall S. “The Unhinged Attorney” Newman, Esq., represented Benson and Steve Vondran represented Gurka at the scheduled case management conference where Judge Orrick claimed that he didn’t understand why he had jurisdiction over the lawsuit.
In Orrick’s view, the plaintiff lives in Colorado, and the defendant lives in Florida and either jurisdiction would be a more appropriate starting point of the case.
Orrick stated that he was inclined either to transfer the case to one of the two jurisdictions or to dismiss the lawsuit without prejudice in order to allow for Newman to refile the lawsuit once the appropriate jurisdiction was determined.
Newman and Vondran were both surprised by this statement, as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s counter notice system seems to indicate that jurisdiction for these lawsuits is the Northern District of California.
When asked by Judge Orrick, Newman admitted that he was unaware of case law establishing the jurisdiction in the Northern District of California. Attorney Vondran did not provide comment on the jurisdictional issues.
Rather than determining jurisdiction during the conference, Judge Orrick ordered Newman to file a five-page brief on the issue that is now due before the Thanksgiving Holliday, with Vondran getting nine days (due to the holiday) to reply to the briefing.
Before the conference concluded, Judge Orrick chastised Vondran for not being appropriately dressed for court. Vondran was not wearing a tie and blamed a recent move and that “all my shirts are in drycleaning.”
Orrick reminded the attorney that Zoom calls were considered extensions of Orrick’s courtroom and should Vondran appear before him again, he needed to be appropriately dressed.
The Orrick hearing was the second case management conference of the day for Newman, who also represented Zachary “Liberty Troll” Kueker at an earlier conference where Kueker’s Liberty Troll LLC is suing attorney Robert Reed along with YouTuber Frauditor Roundup.
Judge Susan Van Keulen started that hearing by stating that they would not be able to move forward with defendant Frauditor Roundup at this time as Newman had not been able to serve that defendant.
Attorney Reed reminded the court that he did provide attorney Newman with the name that was provided by Frauditor Roundup when he used Reed’s now discontinued DMCA counterclaim service.
Reed’s service essentially provided the use of his law practice’s mailing address for those who wanted to maintain their privacy while filing DMCA counterclaims. He also provided a secondary service, for a greater fee, where he would file DMCA counterclaims on behalf of clients without agreeing to be their legal representative.
In this case, Frauditor Roundup used Reed’s services to file the DMCA counterclaim, which was rejected by YouTube. Frauditor Roundup then submitted the same counterclaim, which was accepted.
Reed has since shut down both the service and his law practice.
When Judge Van Keulen inquired about using the name provided by Reed, attorney Newman expressed concerns that he was not entirely sure that it was real or the person who actually owned the Frauditor Roundup YouTube channel.
He explained that he’s had other cases where the DMCA counterclaims were filed by wives or other associates of the actual channel owner and that Frauditor Roundup’s use of Reed’s service indicated that he was attempting to conceal his identity.
Newman also explained that he attempted to subpoena YouTube directly, but they would not provide him the information until they received a Rule 45 subpoena. Van Keulen ordered him to file that subpoena by November 21, indicating that she knew that YouTube would take time to respond to it.
The Judge then denied attorney Reed’s request to combine this lawsuit with a second lawsuit handled by Newman, where Christopher “Denver Metro Audits” Cordova is suing Reed for filling out a DMCA counternotice on behalf of Frauditor Roundup. Frauditor Roundup is not a named defendant in that lawsuit.
Judge Van Keulen indicated that she was reluctant to combine the two lawsuits as there were two sets of defendants and two sets of circumstances. She later denied the request and reminded both men that they have a December case management conference scheduled in that lawsuit.
As attorney Reed indicated his willingness to settle his portion of the lawsuit, Judge Van Keulen offered the use of early alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services to both parties. She would go on to order that ADR needed to be completed by March 13, 2026.
Should the parties not settle the lawsuit before going to trial, a one-day bench trial will be held on April 26, 2027.
