Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 1 of 15 PAGEID #: 830
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
DEAN OBEIDALLAH, CASE NO. 2:17-CV-00720-EAS-EPD
Plaintiff, Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus
v. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers
ANDREW B. ANGLIN, DBA Daily Stormer,
and
MOONBASE HOLDINGS, LLC, DBA Andrew Anglin,
and
JOHN DOES NUMBERS 1–10, Individuals who also assisted in the publication or representation of false statements regarding Mr. Obeidallah,
Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 2 of 15 PAGEID #: 831
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT
In accordance with the Court’s October 2, 2018 Order, ECF No. 41, and as described in the
concurrently filed Status Report, Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah respectfully moves the Court for limited
discovery in aid of establishing a sum-certain of default judgment damages against Defendants Andrew
B. Anglin and Moonbase Holdings, LLC in the above-captioned action. Attached hereto is a
memorandum in support which establishes good cause for Mr. Obeidallah’s request for leave to take
the requested limited discovery. Also attached, as Exhibit 1, is a proposed order for the Court’s
consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Subodh Chandra (trial counsel)
DATED: 11/16/2018 Juvaria Khan (N.Y. Bar No. 5027461) MUSLIM ADVOCATES Subodh Chandra (OH Bar No. 0069233) P.O. Box 66408 Donald Screen (OH Bar No. 0044070) Washington, D.C. 20035 THE CHANDRA LAW FIRM LLC Phone: 202.897.1894 1265 W. 6th St., Suite 400 [email protected] Cleveland, OH 44113-1326 [email protected] Phone: 216.578.1700 Fx: 216.578.1800 [email protected] Admitted pro hac vice [email protected]
Johnathan Smith (D.C. Bar No. 1029373)
Page 1 of 1 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 3 of 15 PAGEID #: 832
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS
Clause Page
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ...... 1
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW ...... 7
III. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANTS ANDREW B. ANGLIN AND MOONBASE ...... 8
IV. REQUEST FOR RELIEF...... 12
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 4 of 15 PAGEID #: 833
Memorandum In Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Additional Discovery In Aid of Default Judgment
Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah respectfully moves this Court pursuant to Rule 26(d)(1) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for leave to take limited discovery in aid of establishing a sum-certain
of default judgment damages against Defendants Andrew B. Anglin (“Defendant Anglin”) and
Moonbase Holdings, LLC (“Moonbase”) (collectively, “Defendants”). The proposed requests for
production are attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
This Court has previously acknowledged Mr. Obeidallah’s good cause for limited third-party
discovery in order to determine “(1) the need for immediate entry of default judgment against
Defendant Moonbase; (2) how liability should be apportioned among the Defendants; and (3) the
extent of Plaintiff’s damages attributable to Defendant Moonbase.” ECF No. 39, at 9. As a result of
that previously authorized discovery, Mr. Obeidallah has now identified certain financial institutions
and accounts used by Defendants Anglin and Moonbase to funnel contributions from the Daily
Stormer’s readership and pay for the Daily Stormer’s operations. The financial details of these accounts
are relevant to the second and third points discussed above, but also to the calculation of appropriate
compensatory and punitive damages for Defendants’ wrongful actions. Therefore, Plaintiff Dean
Obeidallah respectfully seeks leave to take additional, limited, third-party discovery from these
financial institutions in aid of establishing a sum-certain of default judgment damages.
Concurrently with this Memorandum, Mr. Obeidallah is submitting: (1) a Status Report
regarding his efforts to file a Motion for Default Judgment, in which he seeks leave to supplement
that Motion on or before Friday, February 15, 2019; and (2) a Motion for Default Judgment
establishing liability for Defendants Andrew B. Anglin and Moonbase Holdings.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On August 20, 2018, the Court granted Mr. Obeidallah permission to seek limited third-party
discovery from Zappitelli CPAs Inc. (“Zappitelli Inc.”) and Mr. Greg Anglin. Counsel for
Page 1 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 5 of 15 PAGEID #: 834
Mr. Obeidallah then served limited document and discovery subpoenas on Zappitelli Inc. and Greg
Anglin.
With regard to Zappitelli Inc., Plaintiff’s counsel had numerous conversations with John and
Karen Zappitelli, both of whom are officers and employees of Zappitelli Inc., following service of the
document and 30(b)(6) deposition subpoenas. In response to the document subpoena, Mr. Zappitelli
produced, on behalf of Zappitelli Inc., a single document—a confirmation from the Internal Revenue
Service that an Employer Identification Number had been established for Defendant Moonbase. See
Ex. 4-B, Moonbase EIN Ltr. Alternatively, in lieu of the 30(b)(6) deposition, Mr. and Mrs. Zappitelli
provided sworn declarations regarding the nature and extent of their association with the Defendants
and Greg Anglin. Those declarations are attached hereto as Exhibits 3 and 4. Mr. and Mrs. Zappitelli
testified that: (1) in late 2016 or early 2016, Greg Anglin requested that Zappitelli Inc. assist him with
establishing Defendant Moonbase, which involved establishing an EIN and providing Greg Anglin
with form paperwork from the Ohio Secretary of State, see Ex. 3, J. Zappitelli Decl. ¶ 4; Ex. 4, K.
Zappitelli Decl. ¶ 3; and (2) in or around January 2018, conferring with Greg Anglin regarding a draft
Agent Address Change for Defendant Moonbase, see Ex. 3, J. Zappitelli Decl. ¶ 6; Ex. 4, K. Zappitelli
Decl. ¶ 3. Other than those two instances, Mr. and Mrs. Zappitelli testified that neither they nor
Zappitelli Inc. has performed any services for the Defendants. Additionally, Mr. and Mrs. Zappitelli
testified that neither they nor Zappitelli Inc. “has had, or currently has, any communication,
association, or relationship with . . . [Defendant] Anglin or The Daily Stormer.” Ex. 3, J. Zappitelli Decl.
¶ 8; Ex. 4, K. Zappitelli Decl. ¶ 6. As a result, Mr. and Mrs. Zappitelli were unable to provide Plaintiff
with any information regarding the Defendants’ financial condition or their culpability for publication
of the Defamatory Article.
As for Greg Anglin, Mr. Obeidallah effected in-person service of the document and deposition
subpoenas on September 25, 2018. As explained in greater detail in the Status Report filed in
Page 2 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 6 of 15 PAGEID #: 835
conjunction with this Motion, Greg Anglin willfully disregarded his obligations under those subpoenas
for numerous weeks. In response to the document subpoena, Greg Anglin, by and through his
counsel, merely provided Mr. Obeidallah’s counsel with printed copies of previously filed exhibits on
October 31, 2018. In doing so, he denied Mr. Obeidallah the opportunity to review those documents
as they are kept in the ordinary course, and Mr. Obeidallah has no way of knowing whether he would
have received additional probative information if Greg Anglin had complied with the subpoena.
Mr. Obeidallah’s counsel also took Greg Anglin’s deposition testimony on October 31, 2018
in accordance with the Court’s August 20, 2018 Order.1 During that deposition, Mr. Anglin described
how readers of the Daily Stormer have directed hundreds of thousands of dollars in financial
contributions to ”Andrew Anglin.”2 See, e.g., Ex. 5, G. Anglin Tr. 26:10-22 [hereinafter, “G. Anglin
Tr.] (estimating average monthly contributions of $1,500 until 2017, “and then there as a spike in the
deposits”), 27:14-28:4 (estimating total contributions from Daily Stormer readership of $100,000 to
$125,000). Those funds were first directed to Greg Anglin’s office suite—6827 N High Street, Suite
121, Worthington, Ohio 43085 (“Suite 121”). Id. at 9:5-7 (Greg Anglin acknowledging Suite 121 as
office space), 59:25-60:12 (contributions directed to “Andrew Anglin” and Daily Stormer at Suite 121).
In addition to receiving his personal mail at Suite 121, Greg Anglin authorized Defendants Anglin and
1 The recent factual background of this case prior to Greg Anglin’s deposition is set forth in Section I(B) of Mr. Obeidallah’s concurrently filed Status Report, as well as in his previously filed Motion for Limited Discovery in Aid of Default Judgment, ECF No. 31. In the interest of preserving the resources of the Court, it has not been recounted here. 2 As previously explained, it is unclear whether “Andrew Anglin” refers to Defendant Anglin or Moonbase, as Moonbase registered “Andrew Anglin” as a trade name with the Ohio Secretary of State. This is likely just another effort by Greg Anglin and the Defendants to conceal their activities and obfuscate any attempt to hold them liable. In any event, Greg Anglin acknowledged having filed the “Andrew Anglin” trade name registration on Defendant Moonbase’s behalf, and the Daily Stormer has stated that Moonbase is involved with receipt of credit card contributions from the Daily Stormer’s readership, see, e.g., G. Anglin Tr. 67:2-68:9; Pl.’s Mot. for Limited Discovery 8, ECF No. 31 (quoting Daily Stormer article explaining credit card donations would appear as “Moonbase Holdings” on credit card bills).
Page 3 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 7 of 15 PAGEID #: 836
Moonbase to direct their mail to that address. See, e.g., id. at 14:9-11 (Greg Anglin’s personal mail),
23:9-13 (Greg Anglin authorizing Defendant Anglin “to have his personal mail directed to . . . my
office”); 67:2-68:7 (Greg Anglin acknowledging he applied for “Andrew Anglin” trade name on
Moonbase’s behalf); A. Anglin Trade Name Reg. 3, ECF No. 23-10 (Greg Anglin designating
Moonbase’s “[b]usiness address” as his office, Suite 121). In 2017, shortly after protestors announced
their intention to picket outside Suite 121,3 Greg Anglin established a PO Box—Post Office Box 208,
Worthington, Ohio 43085 (“PO Box 208”)—on Moonbase’s behalf, to which the Daily Stormer
redirected its readers’ contributions. G. Anglin Tr. 107:14-108:7 (Greg Anglin registered for PO Box
208), 116:3-13 (Greg Anglin acknowledging Daily Stormer redirected readers to send contributions to
PO Box 208); PO Box 208 Reg. 2, ECF No. 23-12 (Greg Anglin registering PO Box 208 on behalf of
“[b]usiness/[o]rganization” named “Andrew Anglin,” which is Moonbase’s trade name).
From 2013 to December 2017, Greg Anglin collected contributions that Daily Stormer readers
directed to “Andrew Anglin” at Suite 121 and PO Box 208. G. Anglin Tr. 26:2-9 (five years), 28:22-
29:6 (last deposit in December 2017). Once received, Greg Anglin would take one of numerous
actions. Most often, Greg Anglin would deposit the funds, approximately once a month, into an
account at a bank (“Bank 14“) in the name of “Andrew Anglin.” Id. at 24:16-25:2 (deposits to account
at Bank 1 in the name of “Andrew Anglin”), 25:8-11 (approximately once per month). If the
contributions were foreign currency, Greg Anglin would deposit that currency into his personal
3 Protests were announced online as early as January 5, 2017, with the protest scheduled for January 14, 2017 outside Suite 121. See, e.g., Ex. 6, Ida Vox, Rally Against the Anglins of Daily Stormer in Ohio (Jan. 5, 2017). Days after the protest was announced, on January 12, 2017, Greg Anglin established PO Box 208 on behalf of Defendant Moonbase. See PO Box 208 Reg., ECF No. 23-12. 4 Due to the controversial nature of the Daily Stormer, Mr. Obeidallah is not naming the financial institutions that have likely received donations from Defendants Andrew B. Anglin and Moonbase Holdings, LLC in this document. Mr. Obeidallah is happy to provide this information to the Court at its request.
Page 4 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 8 of 15 PAGEID #: 837
accounts at another bank (“Bank 2”)5, and then wrote a check to Defendant Anglin, which he then
deposited at Bank 1. Id. at 31:2-14. Beginning in 2017, Greg Anglin also deposited contributions
from the Daily Stormer’s readership in U.S. currency into his personal account at Bank 2, and then
wrote checks to the account of “Andrew Anglin” at Bank 1. Id. at 31:15-32:13.
Greg Anglin would also use the contributions directed to “Andrew Anglin” as
“reimbursement” for services that he would perform on behalf of the Defendants, including those
relating to the Daily Stormer. See, e.g., id. at 49:7-51:25 (Greg Anglin “reimbursed” for paying fee to
register Moonbase with Ohio Secretary of State by keeping cash from Daily Stormer contributions),
54:11-55:3 (Greg Anglin “reimbursed” for paying fee to register “Andrew Anglin” as trade name for
Moonbase).6 Greg Anglin would often pay fees associated with those services from his personal bank
account at Bank 2 or his personal credit card before seeking such “reimbursement.” See e,g., id. at
52:12-52:25 (check from Bank 2 to pay fee associated with filing Moonbase’s Articles of Organization),
53:23-55:6 (potential check from Bank 2 to pay for Moonbase’s registration of trade name “Andrew
Anglin”), 80:20-81:22 (Greg Anglin’s personal credit card to register domain www.dailystormer.com).
Finally, Greg Anglin used a large sum of the Daily Stormer’s contributions for his own benefit—
having “borrowed” approximately $60,038 for a “real estate rehab”—which Greg Anglin allegedly
paid back by writing a check from his personal account at another bank (“Bank 3”) and depositing it
into the account for “Andrew Anglin” at Bank 1. Id. at 120:8-121:6 (Greg Anglin “borrowed”
$60,038), 123:4-23 (check from Bank 3 to Bank 1).
5 Mr. Greg Anglin’s checking account at Bank 2 has since been closed for unknown reasons, and he later began banking at Bank 3. Id. at 53:1-9. 6 Greg Anglin testified that there was no conversation or agreement reflecting this arrangement with Defendants Anglin or Moonbase. Instead, Greg Anglin claimed this was just an “implicit understanding” regarding how he would perform services for the Defendants. G. Anglin Tr. 51:8-16.
Page 5 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 9 of 15 PAGEID #: 838
Greg Anglin testified that he does not “keep any accounting or ledger of the amounts” that
are sent to “Andrew Anglin” by the Daily Stormer’s readers, id. at 52:2-4, nor did he produce any
materials to Mr. Obeidallah in response to the document subpoena in this regard. Also, though
testifying that he does not “really use email much” and that “[i]t’s not really my thing,” Greg Anglin
stated that it is his practice to delete emails from both his inbox and sent folders. Id. at 12:23-13:3
(email usage), 69:11-14 (deletions).
In addition to contributions from the Daily Stormer’s readers, Greg Anglin testified that he
received “legal documents” directed to Defendants Anglin and Moonbase at Suite 121 and PO Box
208. This is unsurprising since Greg Anglin filed paperwork with the Ohio Secretary of State
representing that Defendant Anglin was Moonbase’s registered agent for service, and service could be
affected at Suite 121 or, later, at PO Box 208. See, e.g., Moonbase’s Agent Address Change 4, ECF
No. 31-27 (designating Moonbase’s “[n]ew [a]ddress of [a]gent” as PO Box 208). Despite his role in
designating Suite 121 and PO Box 208 as appropriate addresses for legal process on Defendant
Moonbase, Greg Anglin testified that he throws all such communications in the trash. G. Anglin
Tr. 58:17-23. Alternatively, he places all legal documents directed to Defendants Anglin “in a big
plastic tub,” where they sit, and he makes no effort to forward them to anyone. Id. at 58:5-16.
In addition to the Daily Stormer contributions, Greg Anglin testified that he maintains two
envelopes for Defendant Anglin—one with foreign currency, and one with United States currency—
in a security box in Greg Anglin’s name at Bank 3. Id. at 121:21-122:15. Greg Anglin was uncertain
how much of Defendant Anglin’s money remains in those envelopes, but he estimated $2,000. Id. at
122:11-15.
Greg Anglin testified that he was not aware of any bank accounts that Defendant Moonbase
uses, whether it has any financial obligations, whether it owns any property, or whether it still exists
as a business entity. G. Anglin Tr. 20:2-15, 61:4-9. He also does not know whether Moonbase files
Page 6 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 10 of 15 PAGEID #: 839
tax returns. Id. at 57:19-21. He has allegedly never known the financial condition of Moonbase, and
does not know whether it is on the cusp of insolvency. Id. at 106:25-107:13. He also testified that, as
far as he is aware, Moonbase does not maintain any financial records. Id. at 32:14-19. Similarly, he
testified that he does not know why readers of the Daily Stormer were sending the contributions that
he deposited, nor does he allegedly know what Defendants Anglin or Moonbase do with that money.
Id. at 147:7-149:5.
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW
Courts enjoy “broad discretion” to order discovery. Arista Records, LLC v. Does 1-15, No. 2:07-
cv-450, 2007 WL 5254326, at *3 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 5, 2007). While the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
anticipate that discovery will typically not begin “before the parties have conferred as required as
required by Rule 26(f),” they allow for discovery prior to the Rule 26(f) conference “by court order.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d); see also Arista Records, 2007 WL 5254326, at *2. This provision requires that the
party requesting expedited discovery show “good cause,” which “may be found where the need for
expedited discovery, in consideration of the administration of justice, outweighs the prejudice to the
responding party.” Arista Records, 2007 WL 5254326, at *2 (internal quotations and citations omitted).
Courts have regularly found good cause to authorize such discovery when, inter alia, a defendant
defaults and the plaintiff needs discovery in order to establish liability and/or damages in pursuit of
default judgment. See, e.g., Twitch Interactive, Inc. v. Johnston, No. 5:16-cv-03404-BLF, 2017 WL 1133520,
at *4 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2017) (authorizing discovery in aid of forthcoming motion for default
judgment from payment processors, financial institutions, and co-defendant); Antoine v. Boutte,
No. 3:15-cv-00561-JWD-EWD, 2016 WL 6138252, at *4 (M.D. La. Oct. 20, 2016) (same from third-
party distributors regarding quantum of damages); Adobe Sys. Inc. v. Bunhey, No. 5:13-cv-01365-VAP-
OPX, 2013 WL 12140304, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 29, 2013) (same from third-party distributors
regarding defaulting defendant’s purchase, sale, and/or distribution of counterfeit products); Texas
Page 7 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 11 of 15 PAGEID #: 840
Guaranteed Student Loan Corp. v. Dhindsa, No. 1:10-cv-00335-LJO-SKO, 2010 WL 2353520, at *3 (E.D.
Cal. June 9, 2010) (same from defaulting defendant regarding quantum of damages); Sheridan v. Oak
Street Mortg., LLC, 244 F.R.D. 520, 522 (E.D. Wis. 2007) (same regarding class certification and
quantum of damages).
III. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANTS ANDREW B. ANGLIN AND MOONBASE
The Court should grant Mr. Obeidallah leave to take limited discovery in aid of establishing a
sum-certain of default judgment damages, because doing so is necessary for the purposes of
quantifying the amount of compensatory and punitive damages attributable to Defendants Anglin and
Moonbase.
In both his Complaint and his concurrently filed Motion for Default Judgment, Mr. Obeidallah
seeks punitive damages for the false and defamatory actions and statements made by Defendants
Anglin and Moonbase. See, e.g., Compl. ¶ 74, ECF No. 1; id. at 37 (prayer for relief). As the Supreme
Court of Ohio has noted, the purposes of punitive damages are “(1) to punish the wrongdoer, and (2)
to deter others from similar conduct.” Wagner v. McDaniels, 459 N.E.2d 561, 564 (Ohio 1984).
Whether a damages award succeeds in punishing a wrongdoer or deterring others depends on the
scale of the damages award relative to the net worth of the defendant, and in particular, to the amount
of profit that that wrongful action generated for the wrongdoer. See id. (stating “evidence of a
defendant’s net worth may be considered by the fact-finder in determining appropriate punitive
damages”).
In this case, Defendants Anglin and Moonbase likely received hundreds of thousands of
dollars in “contributions” from readers of the Daily Stormer who were encouraged by their wrongful
actions. G. Anglin Tr. at 27:22-28:4. These donations “spike[d]” upward in 2017, when the
defamatory article that harmed Mr. Obeidallah was posted. Id. at 26:14-22. And Defendant Anglin
has specifically used his wrongful actions against Mr. Obeidallah as the basis to request additional
Page 8 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 12 of 15 PAGEID #: 841
contributions from the Daily Stormer readers, posting: “Presumably, even if Dean [Obeidallah]
disappears, the Association of Moslems will still sue me. So send me some money, lmao.“ 7
See Ex. 8, Daily Stormer, Steven Crowder Allegedly Hunting Manchester Bombing Mastermind Dean Obeidallah
in Isis-Occupied Syria (Aug. 29, 2017) (emphasis added). The twin goals of punishment and deterrence
will not be achieved if Defendants Anglin and Moonbase are permitted to profit from their extreme
and tortious conduct, and a fulsome accounting of their profits is necessary to avoid such an outcome.
Therefore, the requested discovery from Banks 1, 2, and 3 regarding the amount of money received
by Defendants Anglin and Moonbase, and the timing of those payments, are relevant to
Mr. Obeidallah’s crafting of a reasonable and appropriate damages request in this case.
In addition to punitive damages, information about the Defendants’ financial conditions is
relevant to the preliminary calculation of damages for many of Mr. Obeidallah’s claims. See, e.g., State,
ex rel. Brown v. Dayton Malleable, Inc., 438 N.E.2d 120, 128 (Ohio 1982) (stating, in dicta, that “evidence
of the wealth of the defendant is admissible . . . in cases where wealth is necessarily involved in
determining damages, such as in actions for defamation or injury to reputation”); Sayavich v. Creatore,
2009-Ohio-5270, ¶ 80, 2009 WL 3165555, at *8 (Oh. App. Ct. Sep. 29, 2009) (assessing defamation
claim and “conclude[ing] that evidence of a defendant’s net worth is only relevant as to punitive
damages”); Gosden v. Louis, 687 N.E.2d 481, 499 (Oh. App. Ct. 1996) (“Information about defendants’
financial status is admissible in defamation cases to help the jury determine proper awards of
compensatory and punitive damages. Without this information, a jury is less able to determine the
likely influence a defendant may have had in the community. More importantly, a jury cannot
determine what would constitute an effective punitive damage award unless they have an
understanding of the defendant’s financial status.”).
7 The acronym “lmao” is a crass slang abbreviation that indicates laughter. Oxford Living Dictionaries, LMAO, https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/lmao (November 16, 2018).
Page 9 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 13 of 15 PAGEID #: 842
With respect Mr. Obeidallah’s claim for common-law misappropriation of name and likeness,
Courts have specifically noted that “the monetary benefit that [defendant] received as a result of a
wrongful use of [plaintiff]’s name is an appropriate (although not exclusive) measure of damages.” See
James v. Bob Ross Buick, Inc., 855 N.E.2d 119, 124 (Ohio Ct. App. 2006). In similar actions for invasion
of privacy of public figures, expert witnesses opining on appropriate damages have cited the financial
conditions of the defendants, including the “value” of a defendant’s website. See Ex. 7, Hulk Hogan
Sex Tape Earned Gawker Up to $15M, Jury Told, Law360,
https://www.law360.com/articles/770586/hulk-hogan-sex-tape-earned-gawker-up-to-15m-jury-told
(last visited November 15, 2018); Ex. 9, Hulk Hogan Awarded $115 Million in Privacy Suit Against
Gawker, New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/19/business/media/gawker-hulk-
hogan-verdict.html (last visited November 15, 2018) (Noting that punitive damages calculation “raises
the prospect that [defendant] will have to submit to a detailed examination of its finances in court so
the jury can assess the scale of the damages”). Mr. Obeidallah has engaged an expert witness to
provide similar analysis here, but cannot do so without the limited, additional discovery sought.
Mr. Obeidallah was hopeful that information regarding the financial status of Defendants
Anglin and Moonbase, which is relevant to demonstrating the compensatory and punitive damages to
which he is entitled, could obtained through the subpoenas directed to Greg Anglin and Zappitelli Inc.
However, Greg Anglin did not produce any documents other than those already filed by
Mr. Obeidallah in this case (in fact, he merely provided Mr. Obeidallah’s counsel with print outs of
previously filed exhibits), and neither Greg Anglin nor Zappitelli Inc. was able to provide information
regarding the financial condition of the Defendants. Greg Anglin also professed ignorance as to the
finances of Defendants Anglin and Moonbase, and confirmed that, although he funneled
contributions from the Daily Stormer’s readership on behalf of Defendants Anglin and/or Moonbase
for five years, he did not keep any logs or records regarding the amounts involved in those
Page 10 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 14 of 15 PAGEID #: 843
transactions. See, e.g., G. Anglin Tr. 32:14-19, 51:2-4, 57:19-21, 61:4-9, 106:25-107:13, 147:7-149:5.
Alternatively, Zappitelli Inc. confirmed that it did not perform financial services for Defendants, and
as a result did not have records relating to their financial conditions. Ex. 3, J. Zappitelli Decl. ¶¶ 4, 6-
7. Therefore, this information can only be obtained from the financial institutions that Greg Anglin
used to funnel contributions from Daily Stormer’s readership.
Specifically, in order to answer the outstanding questions regarding Defendants’ financial
condition, which are necessary in support of his Motion for Default Judgment, Mr. Obeidallah
respectfully seeks leave to issue narrowly-tailored subpoenas duces tecum to the financial institutions
identified above in Part I as Banks 1, 2, and 3. The proposed requests for production, the substance
of which would be incorporated in those subpoenas, are attached hereto as Exhibit 2. As explained
above, good cause exists for such discovery because Greg Anglin used accounts at Banks 1, 2, and 3
to funnel contributions from the Daily Stormer’s readership on behalf of Defendants Anglin and
Moonbase, and because he professed uncertainty regarding the volume of those transactions. See, e.g.,
G. Anglin Tr. 24:16-25:5, 32:8-13, 113:2-17. This information cannot be obtained from any other
sources because: (1) Defendants Anglin and Moonbase are in default, and thus unlikely to respond to
discovery requests8; and (2) Greg Anglin, who processed donations on behalf of both Defendants,
testified that he was not aware of any other source of financial records that would reflect this
information.
8 As previously explained, Defendants Anglin has regularly acknowledged and mocked the pendency of this federal action. See, e.g., Mem. In Supp. of Pl.’s Mot. for Limited Discovery 6, ECF No. 31. This was again confirmed through Greg Anglin’s testimony. According to Greg Anglin, he received a call from Defendant Anglin (from a U.S. number) days before he was deposed, and during that call Defendant Anglin made statements suggesting he was already aware of the subpoena’s scope. G. Anglin Tr. 35:5-10, 36:10-22.
Page 11 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 15 of 15 PAGEID #: 844
IV. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
For these reasons, Mr. Obeidallah respectfully moves this Court pursuant to Rule 26(d)(1) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for leave to take limited discovery in aid of establishing a sum-
certain of default judgment damages. The requests for production, which Mr. Obeidallah proposes
directing to Banks 1, 2, and 3, are attached as Exhibit 2.
Respectfully submitted,
DATED: 11/16/2018 /s/ Subodh Chandra (trial counsel)
Subodh Chandra (OH Bar No. 0069233) Donald Screen (OH Bar No. 0044070) Attorneys for Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah THE CHANDRA LAW FIRM LLC 1265 W. 6th St., Suite 400 Cleveland, OH 44113-1326 Phone: 216.578.1700 Fx: 216.578.1800 [email protected] [email protected]
Johnathan Smith (D.C. Bar No. 1029373) Juvaria Khan (N.Y. Bar No. 5027461) MUSLIM ADVOCATES P.O. Box 66408 Washington, D.C. 20035 Phone: 202.897.1894 [email protected] [email protected] Admitted pro hac vice
Page 12 of 12 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-2 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 848
EXHIBIT 1 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-2 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 849
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
DEAN OBEIDALLAH, CASE NO. 2:17-CV-00720-EAS-EPD
Plaintiff, Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus
v. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers
ANDREW B. ANGLIN, DBA Daily Stormer,
and
MOONBASE HOLDINGS, LLC, DBA Andrew Anglin,
and
JOHN DOES NUMBERS 1–10, Individuals who also assisted in the publication or representation of false statements regarding Mr. Obeidallah,
Defendants.
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Additional Discovery in Aid of
Default Judgment. For good cause shown, Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.
It is ORDERED that Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah may serve the limited, immediate discovery
as set forth in Exhibit 2 of the Motion for Additional Discovery in Aid of Default Judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: ______United States Magistrate Judge Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-3 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 1 of 4 PAGEID #: 850
EXHIBIT 2 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-3 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 2 of 4 PAGEID #: 851
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
DEAN OBEIDALLAH, CASE NO. 2:17-CV-00720-EAS-EPD
Plaintiff, Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus
v. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers
ANDREW B. ANGLIN, DBA Daily Stormer,
and
MOONBASE HOLDINGS, LLC, DBA Andrew Anglin,
and
JOHN DOES NUMBERS 1–10, Individuals who also assisted in the publication or representation of false statements regarding Mr. Obeidallah,
Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S PROPOSED REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENT AND THINGS
Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah submits the following document requests (which will accompany
subpoenas duces tecum) in support of his Motion for Additional Discovery in Aid of Default
Judgment. For sake of brevity, Mr. Obeidallah has foregone providing the Court with definitions,
instructions, and other portions of the proposed subpoenas which are ancillary to assessing whether
the requests are appropriately tailored to the relief requested and minimize the burden on the requested
party. Mr. Obeidallah is happy to submit complete copies of the subpoenas duces tecum upon the
Court’s request.
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-3 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 3 of 4 PAGEID #: 852
I. BANK 11
A. Documents to Be Produced
1. Documents sufficient to show the transactional information during the Relevant Period2, including dollar value, date, deposit slips, and images, of any checks deposited into or withdrawn from any account associated with: (a) Andrew B. Anglin; or (b) Moonbase Holdings, LLC.
2. Documents sufficient to show the transactional information during the Relevant Period, including dollar value, date, and deposit slips, of any cash deposited into or withdrawn from any account associated with: (a) Andrew B. Anglin; or (b) Moonbase Holdings, LLC.
3. Documents sufficient to show the history of account balances and transactions during the Relevant Period, including amounts that have been deposited or withdrawn, and merchant names and transaction descriptions, for any account associated with: (a) Andrew B. Anglin; or (b) Moonbase Holdings, LLC.
II. BANK 2
A. Documents to Be Produced
1. Documents sufficient to show the transactional information during the Relevant Period, including dollar value, date, recipient, and images, of any checks withdrawn from or deposited into any account associated with Gregory Mark Anglin where the transaction involved one or more of the following parties: (a) Andrew B. Anglin; (b) Moonbase Holdings, LLC; (c) the Daily Stormer; (d) GoDaddy; (e) Zappitelli CPA Inc.; (f) the U.S. Postal Service; or (g) the Ohio Secretary of State.
2. Documents sufficient to show the transactional information during the Relevant Period, including dollar value, date, and any associated deposit slips or receipts, of any cash withdrawn from or deposited into any account associated with Gregory Mark Anglin.
3. Documents sufficient to show the transactional information during the Relevant Period, including dollar value, date, merchant name, and description, of any credit or debit account associated with Gregory Mark Anglin where the transaction involved one or more of the following parties: (a) Andrew B.
1 Due to the controversial nature of the Daily Stormer, Mr. Obeidallah is not naming the financial institutions that have likely received donations from Defendants Andrew B. Anglin and Moonbase Holdings, LLC in this document. Mr. Obeidallah is happy to provide this information to the Court at its request. 2 Mr. Obeidallah proposes defining “Relevant Period,” as used in each request, as March 1, 2013 to present.
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-3 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 4 of 4 PAGEID #: 853
Anglin; (b) Moonbase Holdings, LLC; (c) the Daily Stormer; (d) GoDaddy; (e) Zappitelli CPA Inc.; (f) the U.S. Postal Service; or (g) the Ohio Secretary of State.
III. BANK 3
A. Documents to Be Produced
1. Documents sufficient to show the transactional information during the Relevant Period, including dollar value, date, recipient, and images, of any checks withdrawn from or deposited into any account associated with Gregory Mark Anglin where the transaction involved one or more of the following parties: (a) Andrew B. Anglin; (b) Moonbase Holdings, LLC; (c) the Daily Stormer; (d) GoDaddy; (e) Zappitelli CPA Inc.; (f) the U.S. Postal Service; or (g) the Ohio Secretary of State.
2. Documents sufficient to show the transactional information during the Relevant Period, including dollar value, date, and any associated deposit slips or receipts, of any cash withdrawn from or deposited into any account associated with Gregory Mark Anglin.
3. Documents sufficient to show the transactional information during the Relevant Period, including dollar value, date, merchant name, and description, of any credit or debit account associated with Gregory Mark Anglin where the transaction involved one or more of the following parties: (a) Andrew B. Anglin; (b) Moonbase Holdings, LLC; (c) the Daily Stormer; (d) GoDaddy; (e) Zappitelli CPA Inc.; (f) the U.S. Postal Service; or (g) the Ohio Secretary of State.
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 1 of 21 PAGEID #: 854
EXHIBIT 3
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 2 of 21 PAGEID #: 855 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 3 of 21 PAGEID #: 856 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 4 of 21 PAGEID #: 857 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 5 of 21 PAGEID #: 858 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 6 of 21 PAGEID #: 859
EXHIBIT A
DOC ID ----> 201625400014 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 7 of 21 PAGEID #: 860 DOC ID ----> 201625400014 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 8 of 21 PAGEID #: 861 DOC ID ----> 201625400014 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 9 of 21 PAGEID #: 862 DOC ID ----> 201625400014 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 10 of 21 PAGEID #: 863 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 11 of 21 PAGEID #: 864
EXHIBIT B
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 12 of 21 PAGEID #: 865 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 13 of 21 PAGEID #: 866
EXHIBIT C
DOC ID ----> 201700502616 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 14 of 21 PAGEID #: 867 DOC ID ----> 201700502616 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 15 of 21 PAGEID #: 868 DOC ID ----> 201700502616 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 16 of 21 PAGEID #: 869 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 17 of 21 PAGEID #: 870
EXHIBIT D
DOC ID ----> 201801700160 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 18 of 21 PAGEID #: 871 DOC ID ----> 201801700160 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 19 of 21 PAGEID #: 872 DOC ID ----> 201801700160 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 20 of 21 PAGEID #: 873 DOC ID ----> 201801700160 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-4 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 21 of 21 PAGEID #: 874 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 1 of 16 PAGEID #: 875
EXHIBIT 4
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 2 of 16 PAGEID #: 876 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 3 of 16 PAGEID #: 877 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 4 of 16 PAGEID #: 878 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 5 of 16 PAGEID #: 879
EXHIBIT A
DOC ID ----> 201625400014 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 6 of 16 PAGEID #: 880 DOC ID ----> 201625400014 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 7 of 16 PAGEID #: 881 DOC ID ----> 201625400014 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 8 of 16 PAGEID #: 882 DOC ID ----> 201625400014 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 9 of 16 PAGEID #: 883 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 10 of 16 PAGEID #: 884
EXHIBIT B
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 11 of 16 PAGEID #: 885 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 12 of 16 PAGEID #: 886
EXHIBIT C
DOC ID ----> 201801700160 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 13 of 16 PAGEID #: 887 DOC ID ----> 201801700160 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 14 of 16 PAGEID #: 888 DOC ID ----> 201801700160 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 15 of 16 PAGEID #: 889 DOC ID ----> 201801700160 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-5 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 16 of 16 PAGEID #: 890 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-6 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 1 of 76 PAGEID #: 891
EXHIBIT 5
Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-6 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 2 of 76 PAGEID #: 892 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-6 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 3 of 76 PAGEID #: 893
Page 9 1 GREGORY ANGLIN
2 asked -- he told me he had a subpoena. I said, can 09:00:49
3 you meet at my office in an hour, and he said yes, 09:00:52
4 and we did. 09:00:55
5 Q. What is your office address? 09:00:56
6 A. It's 6827 North High Street, Suite 121, 09:01:02
7 Worthington, Ohio. 09:01:06
8 Q. Do you share that office space with 09:01:08
9 anybody? 09:01:09
10 A. My particular office Suite? 09:01:13
11 Q. Yes, sir, Suite 121. 09:01:15
12 A. There are some other counselors there, 09:01:17
13 yes. 09:01:19
14 Q. What business is resident at Suite 121? 09:01:19
15 A. Well, there is an office psychiatric, 09:01:25
16 which is a counselor that is there. There is Hope 09:01:29
17 Recovery, which is another counselor that's there, 09:01:36
18 and myself and some gentlemen that do some sort of 09:01:39
19 business consulting. 09:01:45
20 Q. And do you know those gentlemen's business 09:01:47
21 name or personal name? 09:01:49
22 A. Robert is the only thing I remember of his 09:01:51
23 name, yes. 09:01:53
24 Q. Do you have any understanding as to what 09:01:54
25 type of business consulting occurs? 09:01:56
TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-6 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 4 of 76 PAGEID #: 894
Page 12 1 GREGORY ANGLIN
2 not asking for any conversations between you and me. 09:04:13
3 THE WITNESS: Right. 09:04:17
4 A. I'm sorry, could you ask the question one 09:04:23
5 more time? 09:04:25
6 Q. I would like to understand what efforts 09:04:25
7 you undertook to identify whether or not you 09:04:27
8 possessed documents responsive to the five requests 09:04:30
9 detailed in Exhibit 1. 09:04:33
10 A. Well, I carefully read them, and it was my 09:04:34
11 understanding I did not have any copies of anything 09:04:40
12 that had been requested. 09:04:42
13 Q. Do you maintain files related to your 09:04:46
14 businesses at the Suite 121 address we spoke about 09:04:49
15 earlier? 09:04:54
16 A. No, I do not. 09:04:54
17 Q. Where do you maintain documents related to 09:04:55
18 your businesses? 09:04:58
19 A. At my personal residence. 09:04:58
20 Q. Do you use email for your business? 09:05:03
21 A. Well, I'm retired, so I don't really do 09:05:06
22 much business. 09:05:10
23 Q. Have you ever used email related to your 09:05:12
24 businesses in the last five years? 09:05:15
25 A. I mean, I'm sure I've sent some emails. I 09:05:23
TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-6 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 5 of 76 PAGEID #: 895
Page 13 1 GREGORY ANGLIN
2 don't really use email much. It's not really my 09:05:26
3 thing. 09:05:30
4 Q. Understood. Do you have an email address? 09:05:30
5 A. Yes, I do. 09:05:32
6 Q. What is that? 09:05:33
7 A. It's G R E G O R Y M A R K A N G L I 09:05:33
8 N@yahoo. 09:05:39
9 Q. And did you review the emails sent or 09:05:42
10 received from that address in connection with the 09:05:46
11 subpoena? 09:05:49
12 A. I'm not sure I understand what you're 09:05:52
13 asking. I'm sorry. 09:05:54
14 Q. As part of the efforts to respond to the 09:05:55
15 subpoena, did you log into your email account and 09:05:57
16 determine whether or not there's any emails, 09:06:00
17 correspondence, documents, responsive to the subpoena 09:06:02
18 in your email inbox? 09:06:05
19 A. Oh, yes, I did check my email. 09:06:07
20 Q. When did you do that? 09:06:09
21 A. After I received the subpoena. 09:06:10
22 Q. And that analysis revealed that there were 09:06:14
23 no documents responsive? 09:06:17
24 A. None at all, no. 09:06:18
25 Q. Did you talk to any person you worked with 09:06:23
TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580 Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 46-6 Filed: 11/16/18 Page: 6 of 76 PAGEID #: 896
Page 14 1 GREGORY ANGLIN
2 in your business to look for responsive documents? 09:06:27
3 A. When you say my business, I'm not sure 09:06:34
4 what you're asking. 09:06:36
5 Q. I believe you said earlier that you work 09:06:38
6 in the counseling business? 09:06:40
7 A. I'm sorry, I retired about five years ago, 09:06:42
8 so I don't do any counseling. 09:06:46
9 Q. Do you still maintain an office address? 09:06:48
10 A. I get my mail sent to the office, my 09:06:51
11 personal mail. 09:06:53
12 Q. Do you have office space at Suite 121? 09:06:54
13 A. No, I do not. 09:06:57
14 Q. Do you ever visit that location? 09:06:58
15 A. To pick up my mail, yes. 09:07:00
16 Q. For any other reason? 09:07:01
17 A. No, I don't think so. 09:07:08
18 Q. Do you pay monthly rental? 09:07:10
19 A. Yes, I do. 09:07:13
20 Q. And what do you understand that payment to 09:07:15
21 represent? Why are you paying rent? 09:07:18
22 A. Well, because I'm still on a lease for 09:07:21
23 another 18 months. 09:07:23
24 Q. Do you have any possessions at that 09:07:27
25 location? 09:07:29