Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

William John Joseph Hoge,

Plaintiff,
v.
Brett Kimberlin, et al.,
Defendants.

IN THE

CIRCUIT COURT FOR CARROLL COUNTY


MARYLAND
Case No. 06-C-16-070789

PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT BRETT KIMBERLINS MOTION TO


QUASH SUBPOENAS AND AN ORDER TO STAY DISCOVERY
COMES NOW William John Joseph Hoge and opposes Defendant Brett
Kimberlins Motion to Quash Subpoenas and an Order to Stay Discovery. In
opposition, Mr. Hoge states as follows:
I. THE SUBPOENAS WERE PROPERLY ISSUED AND PROPERLY SERVED
Several of the Defendants in the instant lawsuit have attempted to evade or
are currently evading service of process. Defendants Almighty Media and Breitbart
Unmasked maintain a presence on the Internet, but neither publishes a physical
address. Defendants Brett Kimberlin and Matt Osborne have evaded service at
their last known addresses, but each maintains a personal website.
Mr. Hoge requested and the Clerk issued subpoenas directed to the service
providers for almightymedia.com and the web server hosting it;
breitbartunmasked.com and the web server hosting it; osborneink.com; and
brettkimberlin.org. The subpoenas seek the contact information and billing
addresses associated with those accounts. GoDaddy LLC is the service provider
associated with brettkimberlin.org.

The subpoenas were served by a third party using Certified Mail. Docket
Items 32-38.
Defendant Brett Kimberlin wishes the subpoenas to be quashed, but he offers
no evidence supporting facts or law as to why they should be. All Mr. Hoge is
seeking to learn from GoDaddy is correct contact information for Kimberlin. He
evaded service at his last known address and told the Deputy Sheriff attempting to
serve him, [G]ood luck finding me. Affidavit, Docket Item 19, at 2. While
Kimberlin was found attending a hearing at the Montgomery County Circuit
Courthouse and personally served, his correct address is still unknown.
Furthermore, he has not provided it in any of the signature blocks for court papers
filed in this lawsuit. If he will not provide it voluntarily, other means, such as the
subpoena to GoDaddy, are appropriate.
The court should deny Kimberlins motion to quash the subpoena to
GoDaddy.
II. DEFENDANT BRETT KIMBERLIN LACKS STANDING TO MOVE TO QUASH THE
OTHER SUBPOENAS
Unless Brett Kimberlin is claiming that Matt Osborne is a pseudonym he has
been using on the Internet, he has no connection to the osborneink.com website and,
therefore, no standing to interfere with the subpoena seeking information about
that site. Thus far, he has made no such representation.
Similarly, unless Brett Kimberlin is admitting to some business connection
with either Almighty Media or Breitbart Unmasked, he has no standing to interfere

with the subpoenas seeking their contact information. Thus far, he has made no
such admission.
Given Brett Kimberlins lack of standing, the Court should deny his motion to
quash the other subpoenas.
III. THE MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY IS UNTIMELY
Defendant Brett Kimberlin states that [d]iscovery should not commence
unless dispositive motions are denied.1 Motion to Quash, 6. However, an
examination of the docket shows that he has filed an Answer.2 Docket Item 1/1. If
he has filed an Answer, then there is no reason why discovery should not proceed.
Kimberlin has offered no evidence nor has he cited any law in his motion as
to why discovery should be placed on hold. Therefore, the Court should deny
Kimberlins motion to stay discovery.
CONCLUSION
WHEREFORE, Mr. Hoge asks the Court to DENY Brett Kimberlins Motion to
Quash Subpoenas and an Order to Stay Discovery and to grant such other relief as
it may find just and proper.

Mr. Hoge is a bit bemused that Kimberlin should adopt this position. Kimberlin
filed several motions and other court papers trying to get early discovery in
Kimberlin v. Hunton & Williams LLP, et al., Case No. 15-CV-00723-GJH (D.Md.
2016). See, eg., ECF Nos. 75, 93, 98, and 126. Of course, in that lawsuit the roles
were reversed, and Kimberlin was the plaintiff.
2

Kimberlin has not yet served a copy of that Answer on Mr. Hoge.
3

Date: 23 May, 2016

Respectfully submitted,

William John Joseph Hoge, pro se


20 Ridge Road
Westminster, Maryland 21157
(410) 596-2854
himself@wjjhoge.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on the 23rd day of May, 2016, I served copies of the foregoing on
the following persons:
William M. Schmalfeldt by email (with permission)
William Ferguson by First Class U. S. Mail to 10808 Schroeder Road, Live Oak,
California 95953
Brett Kimberlin by First Class U. S. Mail to 8100 Beech Tree Road, Bethesda,
Maryland 20817 (last known address)
Tetyana Kimberlin by First Class U. S. Mail to 8100 Beech Tree Road, Bethesda,
Maryland 20817 (last know address)

William John Joseph Hoge

AFFIDAVIT
I, William John Joseph Hoge, solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury
that the contents of the foregoing paper are true to the best of my knowledge,
information, and belief.
Date: 23 May, 2016
William John Joseph Hoge

William John Joseph Hoge,


Plaintiff,
v.
Brett Kimberlin, et al.,
Defendants.

IN THE

CIRCUIT COURT FOR CARROLL COUNTY


MARYLAND
Case No. 06-C-16-070789

PROPOSED ORDER

Upon consideration of Plaintiffs Opposition to Defendant Brett Kimberlins


Motion to Quash Subpoenas and an Order to Stay Discovery, this ________ day of
_______________, 2016, said motion is hereby DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.

_______________________________________
Circuit Court Judge