Marc Randazza NEVER had a Case against Crystal Cox, yet he STOLE my Intellectual Property, my Online Content, My Search Engine Ranking and directed my work product, my property to a blog post on his law blog SLAMMING ME.
Marc Randazza did NOT have a reasonable or even a high probability of prevailing on the causes of action he sued me for. Yet Judge Gloria Navarro gave Marc Randazza my PROPERTY. Nearly 5 years have passed and he has used my intellectual property to direct traffic to his legal blog for his own benefit. Judge Navarro did this through an UNCONSTITUTIONAL TRO.
Marc Randazza had NO VALID CLAIMS as clearly seen in the DENIAL of his Summary Judgement, Document 200, as seen below.
http://ia800304.us.archive.org/9/items/gov.uscourts.nvd.91330/gov.uscourts.nvd.91330.200.0.pdf
Here we are 5 years later and no end in sight. Seems to me that sure is a good way to steal websites, blogs, online content, search ranking, intellectual property while at the same time defaming your target on your own blog with their domain names now linking to you. And you wipe out critical speech in one be UNCONSTITUTIONAL swoop.
Marc Randazza NEVER had a Case against, yet he used his power as an officer of the court to steal my property and ruin my life.
In cases such as Randazza v. Cox, when someone disputes a name, as I have had this happen before, well it is locked and stays pointed to the servers it is pointed at until due process, until a court ruling on said names. Not with Randazza, he had Godaddy give him the names and let him redirect servers to his HATEFUL, Defaming Blog about me, Crystal Cox, his former Client.
Sunday, November 5, 2017
Judge Grants Randazza's Order. To bad I did not have this judge when Randazza got a TRO against me in Randazza v. Cox
"Before the court are Plaintiff’s Motion for Order to Show Cause Why Defendants Should
not be Held in Contempt (Dkt. No. 17), Defendants Ryan Monahan and Honest Reviews, LLC’s
Emergency Motion to Stay and Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order (Amended) (Dkt. No. 28), Defendant Ghostbed Inc.’s Motion to Dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No. 36),
"For the reasons set forth in the parties’ briefing and at oral argument, the court finds a
lack of “clear and unequivocal” support for a right to relief that is necessary for the entry of the “extraordinary remedy” of a preliminary injunction. Greater Yellowstone Coal v. Flowers, 321 F.3d 1250, 1256 (10th Cir. 2003). As such, the court hereby grants Defendants’ motions to dissolve the Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No. 36), and denies Plaintiff’s oral Motion to convert the Temporary Restraining Order into a Preliminary Injunction. "
"For the foregoing reasons, and for those expressed in the parties’ briefing and oral
arguments, Docket Numbers 17 and 39, as well as Plaintiff’s oral Motion to convert the
Temporary Restraining Order into a Preliminary Injunction, are hereby DENIED. Docket
Number 28 and the portion of Docket Number 36 requesting dissolution of the Temporary
Restraining Order are GRANTED. Defendants’ request for sanctions is DENIED."
Source of Above and Full Judicial Order
Check out Randazza v. Cox Docket and See how to REALLY use prior restraint to suppress speech and flat out steal online content AND top search engine placement.
Lot's More Coming SOON on how to us a TRO effectively to Steal Content, Steal Search Engine Placement, Steal Intellectual Property and More. As inspired by Randazza Legal Group, Marc Randazza, J. DeVoy and Ronald Green.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)