Liberi v Taitz - Appellees Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order

8/8/2019 Liberi v Taitz - Appellees Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order

1/30

Case No. 10-3000

_______________________________________________________

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_______________________________________________________

LISA LIBERI, et al,

Plaintiffs Appellees,

v.

ORLY TAITZ, et al,

Respondents Appellants.

______________________________________________________

On Appeal from the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania,

Case No. 09-cv-01898 ECRJudge Eduardo C. Robreno

____________________________________________________

APPELLEES EMERGENCY EX PARTE MOTION FOR A

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Philip J. Berg, Esquire

Pennsylvania I.D. 9867

555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12

Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531

Ph: (610) 825-3134Fx: (610) 834-7659Email: [email protected]

Attorney for Appellees

Case: 10-3000 Document: 003110370446 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/06/2010


2/30

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pages

TABLE OF CONTENTS....i-iii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES....iv-vi

STATEMENT OF FACTS...1-11

ARGUMENT......11-20

I. APPELLEES MEET THE BURDEN FOR THE ISSUANCE

OF AN EMERGENCY TEMPORARY RESTRAININGORDER (TRO)11-20

A. Likelihood of Success on the Merits of Appellees

Motion/Writ...13-17

C. Harm to Opposing Parties and Risk to the Public Interest18-19

WHEREFORE19-20

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE...21

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE...22-23

Exhibit A October 29, 2010 Order of Judge Robreno

Exhibit B Copies of Fraudulent website, http://lisaliberi.com

Exhibit C November 10, 2010 Email from [email protected]

to Appellee Lisa Liberi at [email protected]

Exhibit D Verification of Lisa Liberi

MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO)1

Restraining Order is Not Granted..17-18

B. Irreparable Harm to the Appellees if the Temporary



3/30

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

Exhibit "E" Affidavit of Shirley Waddell

Exhibit "F" November 15, 2010 Email to domainregistry.com

from Appellee Lisa Liberi

Exhibit "G" November 15, 2010 complaint filed by Appellee Lisa

Liberi to domainregistry.com regarding lisaliberi.com

Exhibit "H" November 16, 2010 Email from domainregistry.com

to Appellee Lisa Liberi stating the domain nameLisaliberi.com was enabled with privacy protection

Exhibit "I" November 23, 2010 Email from privacyprotect.org

to Appellee Lisa Liberi informing her the privacyhad been removed from the domain name lisaliberi.com

Exhibit "J" Domain Registry for lisaliberi.com 11/9/2010 through

11/20/2010 showing the domain is registered private

Exhibit "K" Domain Registry for lisaliberi.com 11/21/2010 through

11/21/2010 showing the domain registered toLisa Liberi

Exhibit "L" Domain Registry for lisaliberi.com 11/23/2010 showing

the domain registered to lisaliberi.com in Santa Fe, NY

Exhibit "M" Domain Registry for lisaliberi.com 11/23/2010 tocurrent showing the domain registered to Geoff

Staples in Dallas, Texas

Exhibit "N" Affidavit of Lisa Ostella

Exhibit "O" November 23, 2010 Letter to Judge Robreno fromthe Appellees regarding fraudulent website, http://lisaliberi.com

and the issuance of aa TRO



4/30

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

Exhibit "P" November 22, 2010 Email sent to Dean Picl [email protected]

Exhibit "Q" November 22, 2010 Email sent to PCW from

[email protected]

Exhibit "R" Affidavit of Dean R. Picl

Exhibit "S" December 3, 2010 Post on http://lisaliberi.comEntitled "Philadelphia Lisa is trying to steal my identity"

Exhibit "T" December 3, 2010 Post on http://lisaliberi.com

regarding the subpoena

Exhibit "U" December 3, 2010 Post on http://lisaliberi.comRegarding the 11/23/2010 letter to Judge Robreno

Exhibit "V" December 3, 2010 Post on http://lisaliberi.com

Entitled "Why oh why?"

Exhibit "W" December 3, 2010 Post on http://lisaliberi.com

Entitled "My future"

Exhibit "X" December 4, 2010 Post on http://lisaliberi.com

Entitled "Fraudulent Subpoena & More - Philadelphia

Lisa is trying to steal my identity"

Exhibit "Y" Website http://lisaliberi.com Who-is information



5/30

iv

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

CASES: Page(s)

AT&T v. Winback & Conserve Program, Inc., 42 F.3d 1421 (3d Cir. 1994).12

Bisbee v. John C. Conover Agency, Inc., 186 N.J. Super.

Brockum Company v. Blaylock, 729 F. Supp. 438 (E.D. Pa. 1990)..18

Burger v. Blair Med. Assocs., Inc., 600 Pa. 194, 964 A.2d 374, 376-77

Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373, 96 S. Ct. 2673, 49 L. Ed. 2d 547 (1976).....16

F.T. Int'l, Ltd. v. Mason, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14979

(E.D. Pa. Oct. 11, 2000)..19

Frank's GMC Truck Center, Inc. v. General Motors Corp.,847 F.2d 100, 102-03 (3d Cir. 1988).....17, 18

Harris v. Easton Publishing Co., 335 Pa. Super. 141,

483 A.2d 1377 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1984)...15

In re Arthur Treacher's Franchisee Litig., 689 F.2d 1137 (3d Cir. 1982)..12

Johnson & Johnson Orthopedics, Inc. v. Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co.,

Adams v. Freedom Forge Corp., 204 F.3d 475 (3d Cir. 2000).........12, 19

Acierno v. New Castle Cty, 40 F.3d 645 (3d Cir. 1994)..12

335, 452 A.2d 689, 691-92 (N.J. App. Div. 1982)13, 14

715 F. Supp. 110, 112 n.1 (D. Del. 1989).12, 13

Doran v. Salem Inn, Inc, 422 U.S. 922 (1975).........11, 12

(Pa. 2009)14



6/30

v

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES - Continued

CASES: Page(s)

McNemar v. Disney Store, 91 F.3d 610 (3d Cir. Pa. 1996).13

Pittsburgh League of Young Voters Educ. Fund v. Port Auth.,

2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65885 (W.D. Pa. July 30, 2009)16

Prison Health Servs., Inc. v. Umar, Civil Action No. 02-2642,2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12267 (E.D. Pa. May 8, 2002)...12

Rosker v. Goldberg, 448 U.S. 1306 (1980).13

Swartzwelder v. McNeilly, 297 F.3d 228 (3d Cir. 2002).12

The Republic of the Philippines v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation,43 F. 3d 65 (3d Cir. 1995).....16, 17

United States ex rel. Rahman v. Oncology Assocs.,

198 F.3d 489 (4th Cir. 1999)..19

Vogel v. W.T. Grant Co., 458 Pa. 124, 327 A.2d 133 (Pa. 1974).....15, 18

FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Page(s)

Rule 6512

Marks v. Bell Tel. Co., 460 Pa. 73, 331 A.2d 424 (Pa. 1975)..15

Kline v. Sec. Guards, Inc., 386 F.3d 246 (3d Cir. Pa. 2004)....15



7/30

vi

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES - Continued

MISCELLANEOUS

Page(s)

Restatement (Second) of Torts 652 (1977)......14, 15, 18



8/30

1

1. Appellees respectfully move this Honorable Court for an Emergency

ExParte Temporary Restraining Order [hereinafter "TRO"] directed at Appellants,

Orly Taitz, Linda Belcher [hereinafter "Appellants"]; their witness, Geoff Staples

[hereinafter "Staples"] and anyone on their behalf, enjoining them from any further

cyber-stalking, harassment, intimidation and retaliation, using Appellee Lisa

Liberi's [hereinafter at times "Liberi"] name fraudulently and illegally; and illegal

activities directed at Appellee Lisa Liberi or any of the Appellees.

2. Appellees respectfully move this Honorable Court for an Emergency Order

for the removal and deletion of a website fraudulently set-up in Appellee Lisa

Liberi's name, http://lisaliberi.com; the deletion and removal of all Email addresses

fraudulently set-up, including but not limited to [email protected];

[email protected]; and any other Email address illegally using the

name of Appellee Lisa Liberi and for an Order that Appellee Liberi's picture be

removed from the Internet, which was placed on the Internet by the Appellants and

Staples. In support thereof, Appellees set forth the following:

STATEMENT OF FACTS

3. Plaintiffs (Appellees) filed the within lawsuit on May 4, 2009 due to the

continued illegal and damaging conduct of the Defendants. Defendants

(Appellants) illegal and damaging behaviors include but are not limited to cyber-

stalking, harassment, illegal background checks, spreading false information



9/30

2

regarding the Appellees, inciting violence, invasion of privacy, right to privacy,

false law enforcement reports, threats and other damaging, dangerous illegal

activities.

4. Despite the filing of the within lawsuit, the Appellants have continued their

illegal damaging behaviors. In fact, Appellant Taitz has even tracked down people

in Liberi's life, ex boyfriends, etc. going back twenty-five [25] years and posting

Liberi's family photo, which Appellant Taitz obtained by illegal means, with a

purported home address of Liberi calling her (Liberi) a "blood red herring" (this

was also sent out by mass Emailing to places including white supremacy and

militia groups). It is important to note, Appellant Taitz has put out every bit of

private information of Appellee Liberi, including but not limited to full Social

Security number, date of birth, residency, mother's maiden name, place of birth,

spouse's Social Security number, date of birth, and other confidential data all over

the Internet and by mass Emailing numerous times, including internationally, all of

which are documented in filings in the Lower Court's Docket.

5. On July 2, 2010, Appellant Taitz filed a Notice of Appeal and appealed the

Court's June 25, 2009 Order Dismissing Defendants James Sundquist and Rock

Salt Publishing and the Court's Orders of July 3, 2010 and July 22, 2010 Severing

and Transferring the Case to the Defendants (Appellants) state of residency,

California and Texas.



10/30

3

6. September 8, 2010, Appellant Taitz began filing Motions with the Lower

Court over the issues she had Appealed. See Docket Entry No.'s 143 and 145. In

fact, on September 28, 2010, Appellant Taitz filed a Reply to Opposition, Docket

No. 145 which contained a statement by her witness Geoff Staples along with

forged and altered documents. Appellant Taitz newest claim was to obtain

Liberi's Drivers License, with no other purpose than to post it all over the Internet,

send it by mass Emailing and to verify Liberi's residency to carry out her threats

against Liberi.

7. On October 7, 2010, Appellees filed a Motion with the lower Court for the

issuance of an Order to Show Cause Why Appellant Taitz Should not be

Sanctioned for her continued filing of Motions pertaining to the issues under

appeal; for her false statements and recitations of the underlying case; and for the

filing of altered and forged documents in Appellee Lisa Liberi's name. With

Appellees Motion, they included the evidence and proof of the forged and altered

documents. See the lower Court's Docket Entry 146. See also Appellees

Supplemental Appendice III-A, Exhibit "M", pp. M-1 through M-322.

8. Unbeknownst to the Appellees, Appellants were faxing Judge Robreno and

demanding Ex Parte phone conferences. Judge Robreno issued a Court Order on

October 29, 2010 directing all future Motions to be filed with the Third Circuit

Court of Appeals as the case was under Appeal. See EXHIBIT "A".



11/30

4

9. On November 2, 2010, Appellants filed their Appellants Brief with this

Court. Appellants Brief contained the altered and forged documents in Appellants

Appendices. See Appellants Electronic Appendix filed November 2, 2010, Exhibit

7; and Appellants Corrected Electronic Appendice, Volume 2, Exhibit "7", pp.

197-205 filed November 12, 2010.

10. On November 7, 2010, Appellees filed their Appellees Brief and

Supplemental Appendices and pointed out that Appellants filed forged and altered

documents supplied by Staples.

11. Out of retaliation for filing their Appellee Brief and pointing out the

forgeries by Staples, a horrid disgusting website, http://lisaliberi.com, was set-up

fraudulently in Appellee Liberi's name on November 9, 2010, two (2) days after

Appellees filed their Brief, by Appellants and Staples. Appellants and Staples also

registered the website, http://lisaliberi.com in the name of Liberi as outlined below.

Said website includes sexual innuendoes, false statements, and is purported to be

set-up by Liberi. In addition, this website shows Appellee Lisa Liberi's name to be

copyrighted. See EXHIBIT "B".

12. On November 10, 2010, Liberi received an Email from

[email protected] stating, "Love your new website". See EXHIBIT

"C"; the Verification of Lisa Liberi attached as EXHIBIT "D"; and the Affidavit

of Shirley Waddell attached as EXHIBIT "E".



12/30

5

13. On November 15, 2010, Liberi began Emailing

[email protected] requesting information on who set-up the

horrid website. See EXHIBITS "D" and "F". In addition, Liberi filled out the

domain registry's online abuse form1 and the online abuse report with

privacyprotect.org. See EXHIBITS "D" and "G".

14. On November 15, 2010, Liberi received a response from

domainregistry.com stating that the domain name was privately registered. See

EXHIBITS "D" and "H".

15. After several other communications between Liberi and

privacyprotection.org, privacyprotection.org responded on August 23, 2010 stating

the registration of domain name "lisaliberi.com" was in violation of their

companies Agreement of Use Policy "AUP" and they were removing the

privacy. See EXHIBITS "D" and "I".

16. November 9, 2010 through November 20, 2010, the domain name

lisaliberi.com was registered privately. See EXHIBIT "J". November 21, 2010

through November 22, 2010, the domain lisaliberi.com was registered in the name

of Appellee Lisa Liberi with a Nairobi address and an Email address of

[email protected]. See EXHIBIT "K". On November 23, 2010, the

1https://support.publicdomainregistry.com/support/servlet/TicketDetailServlet?ticketid=507499&key=1015480006&type=open.



13/30

6

domain name lisaliberi.com was registered in the name of Convicted Felon,

Company name: lisaliberi.com, 123 Secret Avenue, Santa Fe, New York 87501

with an Email address of [email protected]. See EXHIBIT "L".

The domain name's registration was again changed on November 23, 2010 to

Geoff Staples name. November 23, 2010 through today's current date, the domain

lisaliberi.com is registered to lisaliberi.com, Geoff Staples, 4014 Fairmount St.,

Suite 106, Dallas, Texas 75219 with an email address

[email protected]. See EXHIBIT "M". See also the Affidavit of Lisa

Ostella attached as EXHIBIT "N". See also EXHIBIT "D".

17. On November 23, 2010, the undersigned sent a letter by facsimile to Judge

Robreno regarding Appellants and Staples, who forged the documents filed as

genuine on September 28, 2010, had set-up a fraudulent website in Appellee

Liberi's name. See EXHIBIT "O". Appellees were seeking an Ex Parte

Emergency TRO. The Appellants were served with the letter to Judge Robreno.

The letter to Judge Robreno was not public record nor was it ever filed on PACER,

which would give the general public access. Judge Robreno never responded to

Appellees letter.

18. On or about November 24, 2010, Liberi was informed that Emails from

[email protected] were sent to individuals located in Liberi's old AOL



14/30

7

account address book and the Emails appeared to be sent from Liberi2. In fact, two

(2) individuals forwarded the Emails they received from

[email protected], which they believed came from Liberi, to Appellee

Liberi. See EXHIBITS "P" and "Q". See also the Affidavit of Dean R. Picl

attached as EXHIBIT "R". Liberi is unsure as to how many fraudulent Emails

were actually sent purporting to be coming from Lisa Liberi. See EXHIBIT "D".

19. On December 3, 2010, Appellants and Staples updated the fraudulent

website http://lisaliberi.com with a headline, "Philadelphia Lisa is trying to steal

my identity"3. In this post, Appellants and Staples twist the facts surrounding the

letter faxed to Judge Robreno. Appellants and Staples were claiming that the

information regarding the domain name lisaliberi.com was obtained by subpoena

and not by the way indicated in the letter to Judge Robreno. Appellants and

Staples put a copy of the Subpoena on the website. See EXHIBIT "S"4. This is

inaccurate, a Subpoena was never legally served upon Public Domain Registry and

the privacy was removed due to the fact the domain violated the Company's AUP.

2 Liberi's AOL account was shut down by some unknown person calling AOL pretendingto be Liberi in or about 2009 after a forged email was filed in the lower Court by

Appellant Linda Belcher, and evidence and proof of the forgery was filed with the lowerCourt.

3http://lisaliberi.com/crime-pays-very-well-thank-you/philadelphia-lisa-is-trying-to-steal-

my-identity/

4 http://lisaliberi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/public-domain-registry-.pdf



15/30

8

See EXHIBIT "T". See also EXHIBITS "D" and "I". Appellants and Staples

also claim the Subpoena is fraudulent because at the top of the Subpoena it states

District of Oregon. As this Court is aware, if the Subpoena being served upon a

company is located outside a hundred [100] miles of the Court, then one must

obtain and/or issue the Subpoena from a Court within the 100-mile radius of the

company. In addition, had they read the document properly, at the top right it

states, " If the action is pending in another district, state where:" and it states

Eastern District of PA. See EXHIBIT "T". In addition, the Appellants and

Staples uploaded the letter in which the Appellants were served with5. See

EXHIBIT "U". Again, the letter to Judge Robreno was not public record and

came from the Appellants. This was obviously in retaliation for Appellees faxing a

letter to Judge Robreno for assistance. Also, two (2) more harassing posts were

added by Appellants and Staples on this fraudulent website, "Why oh why?". See

EXHIBIT "V" and "My future"6, EXHIBIT "W".

5

http://lisaliberi.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Liberi_ltr_to_Robreno_Defcopies_D11_23_2010.pdf

6 http://lisaliberi.com/my-fans/my-future/; http://lisaliberi.com/me-me-all-about-me/why-oh-why/



16/30

9

20. On December 4, 2010, Appellants and Staples changed their post on

http://lisaliberi.com to read, "Fraudulent Subpoenas & More - Philadelphia Lisa

is try to steal my identity"7. See EXHIBIT "X".

21. All of the posts located on this fraudulent website http://lisaliberi.com are

completely a smear campaign, degrading, horrid and disgusting against Appellee

Liberi and were done to retaliate and harass Appellee Liberi for asserting her rights

to redress. See EXHIBITS "D" and EXHIBIT "E".

22. All of the above has been reported to the appropriate law enforcement

divisions, who have advised Liberi to obtain a Restraining Order immediately.

23. The fraudulent website, http://lisaliberi.com and Email addresses were set-

up in Dallas, Texas and are hosted by theplanet.com who was purchased and/or

merged with Softlayer Technologies, LLC located in Dallas. See EXHIBIT "Y".

The undersigned has been attempting to have this website and Email addresses and

any and all references to said website and Email addresses removed, but needs a

Court Order.

24. The actions of the Appellants and Staples are Class three (3) felonies and

amongst other laws, violated the Texas Penal Code Section 33.07 (Online

Harassment); Section 36.06 (Obstruction or Retaliation); See also 18 Pa. Cons.

7

http://lisaliberi.com/crime-pays-very-well-thank-you/philadelphia-lisa-is-trying-to-steal-my-identity/



17/30

10

Stat. 4953 (Retaliation against witness, victim or party in a civil matter) 18 Pa.

Cons. Stat. 4120 (Identity theft); and 18 U.S.C. 1513(e) and 18 U.S.C.

1513(f) (Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant for reporting crimes

to law enforcement), which carries a maximum ten (10) year sentence in prison,

including those who conspired with the perpetrator. See also 18 Pa. Cons. Stat.

4952 (Intimidation of victim or witnesses when reporting crimes).

25. There is absolutely no way to assess damages to Appellee Liberi as a result

of the Appellants and Staples illegal actions, as a Million [$1,000,000] Dollars

would not compensate her. This fraudulent website has been Emailed out to an

unknown amount of individuals, it has been tweeted repeatedly as private tweets,

and updated several times. Moreover, this website is set to go out on

approximately fourteen (14) RSS feeds throughout the Internet. However, the

longer this fraudulent website and Email addresses are allowed to continue the

more damages Liberi will sustain. Moreover, since the Appellants have

fraudulently put out a family photo of Appellee Liberi along with a purported

address, in addition to this fraudulent website with sexual innuendoes, increases

the chances that Appellee Liberi and/or her family will be physically raped,

harmed, injured and/or killed. See the Verification of Lisa Liberi attached as

EXHIBIT "D" and the Affidavit of Shirley Waddell attached as EXHIBIT "E"

26. The following must be issued immediately:



18/30

11

a. A TRO must issue to stop the Appellants, Staples and others on

their behalf from any further retaliation, harassment, intimidation,

cyber-stalking, illegally using Liberi's name and other damaging

and dangerous actions.

b. Additionally, an Order must be issued by this Court for the removal of

this horrid, disgusting fraudulent website in the name of Appellee

Liberi' removal of all references to this website posted at different

locations; and the removal of Appellee Liberi's picture obtained by

Taitz illegally.

c. And, a Court Order must issue to shut down all the Email addresses

fraudulently set-up using Appellee Lisa Liberi's name, including but

not limited to [email protected] and

[email protected].

27. In the alternative, Appellees request this Court to treat this Motion as a Writ

of Mandamus mandating the Lower Court to act upon Appellees Motion.

ARGUMENT

I. APPELLEES MEET the BURDEN for the ISSUANCE of an

EMERGENCY [TRO] TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

28. The traditional standard for granting a TRO requires the Petitioner to show

that in the absence of its issuance she will suffer irreparable injury and also that she

is likely to prevail on the merits. It is recognized, however, that a court must

weigh carefully the interests on both sides,Doran v. Salem Inn, Inc., 422 U.S. 922,

925 (U.S. 1975),Adams v. Freedom Forge Corp., 204 F.3d 475, 482 (3d Cir. Pa.



19/30

12

2000);AT&T v. Winback & Conserve Program, Inc., 42 F.3d 1421, 1427 (3d Cir.

1994);Acierno v. New Castle Cty., 40 F.3d 645, 653 (3d Cir. 1994); In re Arthur

Treacher's Franchisee Litig., 689 F.2d 1137, 1143 (3d Cir. 1982). If relevant, the

Court should also examine the likelihood of irreparable harm to the nonmoving

party and whether the TRO serves the public interest. See AT&T v. Winback, 42

F.3d at 1427. Appellees are clearly entitled to a TRO, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

65, to halt the harassing, intimidating, dangerous and damaging behaviors of the

Appellants, Staples and others on their behalf against Appellee Liberi and the other

Appellees.

29. Specifically, this Court must grant Appellees TRO because: (1) there is

reasonable probability that Appellees will succeed on the merits; (2) the Appellees

will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of relief; (3) there will be little or no

harm to the Appellants and Staples if relief is granted; and (4) the public interest

demands a grant of relief. See, e.g. Swartzwelder v. McNeilly, 297 F.3d 228, 234

(3rd Cir. 2002);Prison Health Servs., Inc. v. Umar, Civil Action No. 02-2642, 2002

U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12267 (E.D. Pa. May 8, 2002).

30. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit requires only a reasonable

likelihood of success. See Johnson & Johnson Orthopedics, Inc. v. Minnesota

Mining & Mfg. Co., 715 F. Supp. 110, 112 n.1 (D. Del. 1989). Appellees easily

meet each of the requirements for a TRO.



20/30

13

31. This Court has jurisdiction and the inherent power to issue a TRO enjoining

the Appellants; Staples; and anyone on their behalf from any further harassment,

intimidation, illegal use of Appellee Liberi's name, illegal use of Appellee Liberi's

picture, cyber-stalking and retaliation against Appellee Liberi and the other

Appellees. This Court also has the inherent power to issue a Court Order for the

removal of the fraudulent website, http://lisaliberi.com and all fraudulent Email

address containing Appellee Lisa Liberi's name, including but not limited to

[email protected], [email protected] and to Order the

removal of any reference to the fraudulent website, Email addresses, and picture of

Liberi obtained by illegal means on the Internet. See Rosker v. Goldberg, 448 U.S.

1306, 1308 (1980).

A. Likelihood of Success on the Merits of Appellees Motion/Writ

32. Of the four (4) considerations, the likelihood of success is arguably the most

important. Here Appellees have a great probability of succeeding on the Merits.

In fact, there is nothing to dispute, the website and Emails speak for themselves,

and the registration of the website and domain name in Staples name and

assistance by the Appellants is clearly proven by the attached exhibits. See

McNemarv. Disney Store, 91 F.3d 610, 616 (3d Cir. Pa. 1996) citing Bisbee v.

John C. Conover Agency, Inc., 186 N.J. Super. 335, 452 A.2d 689, 691-92 (N.J.

App. Div. 1982) (adopting 3 Restatement (Second) of Torts 652D). The fact



21/30

14

Appellants and Staples registered the fraudulent website in Appellee Liberi's name,

shows they have stolen Appellee Lisa Liberi's identity, not to mention the invasion

of privacy.

33. Pennsylvania law recognizes four torts under the umbrella of invasion of

privacy: [1] unreasonable intrusion upon the seclusion of another; [2]

appropriation of another's name or likeness; [3] unreasonable publicity given to

another's private life; and [4] publicity that unreasonably places the other in a false

light before the public." See Burger v. Blair Med. Assocs., Inc., 600 Pa. 194, 964

A.2d 374, 376-77 (Pa. 2009) (citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS

652B-E [*9] (1977)). All of which apply herein, however, the one most

important is the fact Appellants and Staples committed identity theft and

appropriation of Appellee Liberi's name and likeness.

34. Appellants and Staples invaded Appellee Liberi's privacy by appropriation

of her name or likeness without authorization. Invasion of privacy by

appropriation of name or likeness does not require the appropriation to be done

commercially. See Restatement (Second) of Torts 652C cmt. b. (1977). The

invasion of privacy by appropriation of one's name or likeness is a personal right

created to protect one's privacy. There is no question the Appellants and Staples

used a purported image of Liberi and used Liberi's name for their benefit, even

though the benefit sought and obtained was not a pecuniary one, and without



22/30

15

authorization to do so. See Restatement (Second) of Torts 652C cmt. b. (1977).

The interest protected by the rule . . . is the interest of the individual in the

exclusive use of his own identity[T]he right created by it is in the nature of a

property right. See Restatement (Second) of Torts 652C cmt. b. (1977).

35. All of which is be highly offensive to a reasonable person. See Kline v. Sec.

Guards, Inc., 386 F.3d 246, 258 (3d Cir. Pa. 2004) citing Harris v. Easton

Publishing Co., 335 Pa. Super. 141, 483 A.2d 1377, 1383 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1984)

(citing Marks v. Bell Tel. Co., 460 Pa. 73, 331 A.2d 424 (Pa. 1975); Vogel v. W.T.

Grant Co., 458 Pa. 124, 327 A.2d 133, 136 (Pa. 1974)). Thus, the likelihood of

success weighs heavily in favor of the Appellees. The Appellants and Staples

illegal behaviors have been substantial and would be highly offensive to the

ordinary reasonable person. In addition, the Appellants and Staples invasions

have caused the Appellees actual damages, mental suffering, shame and

humiliation, as it would cause to any person of ordinary sensibilities.

36. In fact, Appellee Liberi recently spent five (5) days in the hospital for

complications with her heart due to the harassment and stress induced by the

Appellants and Geoff Staples.

37. Without the issuance of a TRO, Appellees will be deprived of their due

process rights and equal protection of the laws in seeking redress for the damages

they have suffered as a result of the Appellants and Geoff Staples wrong doings.



23/30

16

Deprivation of Constitutional rights is reason for the grant of an Emergency

Temporary Restraining Order. See Pittsburgh League of Young Voters Educ. Fund

v. Port Auth., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65885 (W.D. Pa. July 30, 2009); Elrod v.

Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373, 96 S. Ct. 2673, 49 L. Ed. 2d 547 (1976).

38. In The Republic of the Philippines v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 43

F. 3d 65 (3d Cir. 1995) the District Court issued an Injunction against theRepublic

to stop their harassment and retaliation of witnesses. The Court found that the

Republic's actions "threaten [ ] both the integrity of a United States District Court

and the foundations of our system of justice" and concluded that it must take

action.

39. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the District Court's

observation that such behavior had "a doubly subversive effect. First, witnesses,

who should have been able to rely upon both the implicit and explicit assurances of

the District Court that they could testify fully and freely without fear of any

retaliatory actions, had been betrayed." Moreover, this Court believed the

evidence supported the District Court's conclusion that the Republic "pursued a

campaign designed to smear Padre, Orlina, and Fernandezfor the Republic's

failure to achieve victory in the district court." Because theRepublic was a foreign

sovereign nation and the injunction implicated international comity and interjected

into the Republic's law enforcement, this Court vacated the Injunction and



24/30

17

remanded the case for imposing sanctions as the actions and behaviors of the

Republic were not to be tolerated.

40. The Appellants and Staples are doing the same thing as outlined in the

Republic's case and therefore, constitute the issuance of a TRO to stop the

retaliation and harassment. Additionally, unlike the Republic's Case, this Court

and the District Court have the jurisdiction and power to issue a TRO to enjoin the

Appellants, Staples and anyone on their behalf from any further harassment and/or

retaliation.

B. Irreparable Harm to the Appellees if the Temporary Restraining

Order is NOT Granted

41. The irreparable harm requirement is met if a Petitioner demonstrates a

significant risk that he or she will experience harm that cannot adequately be

compensated after the fact by monetary damages. See Frank's GMC Truck Center,

Inc. v. General Motors Corp., 847 F.2d 100, 102-03 (3d Cir. 1988).

42. There is absolutely no question Appellee Liberi has suffered irreparable

harm and she will continue to suffer damages that cannot be adequately

compensated if the fraudulent website, fraudulent Email addresses, and other

illegal behaviors of the Appellants and Staples are allowed to continue. In fact,

there is a very high probability that Appellee Liberi and her family could be

physically harmed and/or killed.



25/30

18

43. In this circuit, a prima facie showing of appropriation of Appellee Lisa

Liberi's name or likeness creates a rebuttable presumption of irreparable harm.

Irreparable harm arises from the "inherent difficulty of proving damages caused by

confusion" and "the impairment of intangible values such as the strength of a

person's name and identity, reputation and good will." See Vogel v. W.T. Grant

Co., 327 A.2d 133, 136 (Pa. 1974) (adopting 652 of the Restatement (Second) of

Torts, Tentative Draft, and thereby recognizing that "appropriation of another's

name or likeness" is one of four causes of action for invasion of privacy);Brockum

Company v. Blaylock, 729 F. Supp. 438 at 446 (E.D. Pa. 1990) (concluding that

plaintiffs suffered irreparable harm because defendants violated their right of

publicity).

44. Petitioners will continue to suffer irreparable injury that the Court cannot

fully compensate. Therefore, a TRO is imperative. See Brockum Company v.

Blaylock, 729 F. Supp. 438 (E.D. Pa. 1990) andFrank's GMC Truck Center, Inc. v.

General Motors Corp., 847 F.2d 100, 102-03 (3d Cir. 1988).

C. Harm to Opposing Parties and Risk to the Public Interest

45. Granting Appellees Motion for a TRO enjoining the Appellants; Staples; and

anyone on their behalf from any further retaliation, harassment, intimidation, and

using Appellee Liberi's name fraudulently will not result in any harm to the

Appellants or Staples.



26/30

19

46. Consideration of the relative harm to the Respondent and the public interest

also weighs heavily in favor of Appellees. See Adams v. Freedom Forge Corp.,

204 F.3d 475 (3d Cir. Pa. 2000). First, the irreparable harm Appellees would

suffer in the absence of a TRO substantially outweighs the harm to the Appellants

and Geoff Staples. Issuing a TRO against the Appellants and Staples will not

adversely affect the public interest. To the contrary, the prevention of cyber-

stalking, retaliation, harassment, intimidation, invasion of privacy, fraudulently and

illegally using another's name (Identity Theft), and appropriation of ones name and

likeness weighs in favor of protecting the general publics interest. Even events

affecting only private citizens, is in the general public interest." F.T. Int'l, Ltd. v.

Mason, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14979 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 11, 2000), at *2. See also

United States ex rel. Rahman v. Oncology Assocs., 198 F.3d 489, 496-97 (4th Cir.

1999).

WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated herein and for good cause shown,

Appellees respectfully request this Honorable Court to grant their Motion and:

A. Issue an Emergency Temporary Restraining Order [TRO] against

Appellants Orly Taitz, Linda Sue Belcher; their witness, Geoff Staples and anyone

acting on their behalf enjoining the parties from cyber-stalking, retaliation,

harassment, intimidation and fraudulently using Appellee Lisa Liberi's name, and



27/30

20

to enjoin any and all illegal activities directed at Appellee Lisa Liberi or any of the

Appellees;

B. Issue an immediate Order upon the Appellants Orly Taitz, Linda

Belcher, Geoff Staples and Softlayer Technologies, LLC (the hosting company of

the website and Email addresses) for the immediate removal and deletion of

http://lisaliberi.com; the deletion and removal of all Email addresses including but

not limited to [email protected]; [email protected]; and

any other Email address illegally using the name of Appellee Lisa Liberi; and

C. An Order directing Appellants Orly Taitz and Linda Belcher; Geoff

Staples; and every website/blog carrying Appellants and Staples postings to

remove the picture of Lisa Liberi, which the parties illegally obtained.

D. An Order that Appellants and Staples are to reimburse Appellees Fifty

Thousand [$50,000.00] Dollars for the time spent regarding the fraudulent website,

Emails and this Motion.

. Respectfully submitted,

Dated: December 6, 2010 _____________________________Philip J. Berg, Esquire

555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531Identification No. 09867Ph: (610) 825-3134Email: [email protected]

Attorney for the Appellees

s/ Philip J. Berg



28/30

21

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I hereby certify that this Motion complies with the page limit requirement of

rule 27(d)(2), in that it contains twenty [20] pages. I certify that the Motion is

typed in Times New Roman, 14-point font in compliance with Federal Rules of

Appellate Procedures 32(a)(5) and 32(a)(6).

I hereby certify that that a virus detection program, Symantec Norton Anti-

Virus Security 2009, has been run and no virus was detected.

_________________________Philip J. Berg, Esquire

s/ Philip J. Berg



29/30

22

U.S. District Court,Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case Number: 09-cv-01898 ECRCourt of Appeals No. Case Number: 10-3000

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT__________________________

LISA LIBERI, et al,

Plaintiffs Appellees,

v.

ORLY TAITZ, et al,

Respondents Appellants.

__________________________

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE_____________________

I, Philip J. Berg, Esquire, hereby certify that Appellees Motion for an

Emergency ExParte Temporary Restraining Order was served this 6th day of

December, 2010 electronically through the ECF system upon the following

Appellants:

Orly TaitzDefend our Freedoms Foundation, Inc. (unrepresented)

26302 La Paz Ste 211Mission Viejo, CA 92691

Email: [email protected]



30/30

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, Continued

Neil SankeyThe Sankey Firm, Inc. a/k/a The Sankey Firm (unrepresented)

Sankey Investigations, Inc.

2470 Stearns Street #162Simi Valley, CA 93063


Linda Sue Belcher201 Paris

Castroville, Texas 78009Email: [email protected] and


Ed HaleCaren Hale

Plains RadioKPRN

Bar H Farms1401 Bowie Street

Wellington, Texas 79095Email: [email protected]; [email protected];

ed@barhfarnet; and [email protected]

Geoff Staples3443 Turtle Creek Blvd., Apt. 205

Dallas, Texas 75219Email: [email protected]

________________________PHILIP J. BERG, ESQUIREAttorney for the Appellees

s/ Philip J. Berg


Documents

Liberi v Taitz - Appellees Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order