LHF Productions Sues Another 408 Alleged “London Has Fallen” Downloaders in Chicago

September, like August, was a busy month for LHF Productions in the Northern District of Illinois. On September 28th LHF Productions  filed an addition 11 copyright infringement lawsuits against 408 individuals who are yet unnamed.

The next step in these lawsuits are that the targeted internet subscribers will receive an LHF Productions subpoena and a letter from Comcast or CenturyLink about the copyright infringement allegations.

LHF Productions , through its attorney in Illinois attorney Michal Hierl of the law firm Hughes Socol Piers Resnick Dym Ltd filed these lawsuits alleging that accountholders associated with certain IP addresses illegally downloaded the film “London Has Fallen” in violation of the US Copyright Act.

It is expected that most of the newest 408 people to be targeted in this latest round of lawsuits will receive Comcast letters informing them of the copyright infringement claims and an LHF Productions subpoena demanding the ISP turn over their names and addresses.

The next step in these lawsuits are that the targeted internet subscribers will receive an LHF Productions subpoena and a letter from Comcast or CenturyLink about the copyright infringement allegations.

If you receive a subpoena, the best thing to do is to talk with an experienced lawyer.

  • Learn about what the notice means.
  • Do you want to quickly and anonymously make this go away by resolving the lawsuit by settling?
  • Or do you want to prepare to fight the lawsuit?
  • Should you file a motion to quash the subpoena
  • Ask every question that concerns you.

CONTACT US FOR A FREE ATTORNEY CONSULTATION

Antonelli Law is the most experienced BT copyright defense firm in the country, and has represented many copyright infringement defendants in the Northern District of Illinois federal court. Call us at 312-201-8310 to learn your legal options. We will tell you the risks and benefits of each one.

Attorney Jeffrey Antonelli is admitted to  the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois and many others and can appear in federal court anywhere in the country. Antonelli Law has defended more than 1,500 clients accused of BitTorrent copyright litigation since 2011.

Attorneys: Don’t risk malpractice trying to represent a client in a copyright lawsuit where the  loser pays statutory and attorneys fees. We accept attorney referrals and are very experienced in this specialized litigation.

Name of ISP eg. Comcast

Party Suing or issuing subpeona (Plaintiff)

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

State (required)

Daytime Phone

Subject

Your Message

captcha

If you are the account holder for an internet account, your name is linked to an IP address. If you receive a letter from  Comcast and a subpoena from LHF Productions Inc. to reveal your identity, call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310 about motions to quash the subpoena and other options.

Attorney Law’s attorneys are admitted to many federal courts from California to New York and in between. Attorney Jeffrey Antonelli is admitted to the District Court of Colorado, the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois, and many others and can appear in federal court anywhere in the country. Antonelli Law has defended more than 1,500 clients accused of BitTorrent copyright litigation since 2011.

RELATED POSTS

I received a Comcast letter and Subpoena – Help!

Judge Allows LHF Productions Defendants to Proceed Anonymously

LHF Productions Inc. Motion for Protective Order Denied

LHF Productions, Inc. to Ask Illinois Judges to Allow Comcast ISP Subpoenas

Illinois Judge Grants Request by LHF Productions Inc Lawsuit to Issue ISP Subpoenas to Reveal Names of People Who Allegedly Downloaded “London Has Fallen” Using BitTorrent

LHF Productions Inc. adds 315 Defendants in Illinois

#LHFProductions #LondonHasFallen

LHF Productions, Inc – Northern District of Illinois

  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-31 1:2016-cv-09305
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-28 1:2016-cv-09307
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-32 1:2016-cv-09308
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-34 1:2016-cv-09309
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-35 1:2016-cv-09310
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-25 1:2016-cv-09312
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-22 1:2016-cv-09313
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-34 1:2016-cv-09315
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-33 1:2016-cv-09316
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-18 1:2016-cv-09318
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-31 1:2016-cv-09320
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-32 1:2016-cv-09323
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-26 1:2016-cv-09324
  • LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC. v Does 1-27 1:2016-cv-09325
  • LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-08403
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-08408
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-08410
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-08411
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-16 16-cv-08412
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-08413
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-08415
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-08416
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-08417
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-08419
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-34 16-cv-08422
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07673
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07674
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-33 16-cv-07675
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-07676
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-32 16-cv-07677
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07679
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07680
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07681
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-07684
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-07687
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07690
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-06796
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-06797
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-06798
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-06799
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-19 16-cv-06800
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-18 16-cv-06801
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-30 16-cv-06802
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-06803
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-06805
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-06806
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-39 16-cv-06808
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-06811
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-30 16-cv-04730
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-04731
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04732
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-19 16-cv-04733
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-04734
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-04740
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04741
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-04742
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04743
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-04744
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03903
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-03904
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03892
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-21 16-cv-03902
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-03896
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03899
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-03907
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-03897
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-03905
    LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-03887

If you receive a letter from  Comcast and a subpoena from LHF Productions Inc. to reveal your identity, call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310.

 

LHF Productions Inc Subpoenas Residents Accused of Downloading "London Has Fallen"
LHF Productions Inc Subpoenas Chicago Residents Accused of Downloading “London Has Fallen”

LHF Productions Files Second Utah Copyright Lawsuit Against Comcast and CenturyLink Subscribers

LHF Productions, Inc.  the copyright holder for the movie “London Has Fallen” continues its national copyright enforcement campaign by filing lawsuits in Utah.  LHF Productions, Inc. is suing internet users in Utah and other jurisdictions for allegedly downloading the film using file-sharing software over the internet in violation of the US Copyright Act

On August 5th, we reported that LHF Productions filed a lawsuit against Comcast Cable internet subscribers in Salt Lake City. That case is LHF Productions Inc. v. Does 1-23, 2:2016-cv-00860. Click here for a copy of the lawsuit complaint).

On September 27th, LHF Productions, Inc filed its second copyright infringement complaint against Comcast and CenturyLink subscribers in case number 2:16-cv-01007-BCW LHF Productions Inc. v. Does 1-30 (click here for a copy of the Complaint).

The next step in these lawsuits are Utah internet subscribers receiving an LHF Productions subpoena and a letter from Comcast or CenturyLink about the copyright infringement allegations.

If you receive a subpoena, the best thing to do is to talk with an experienced lawyer.

  • Learn about what the notice means.
  • Do you want to quickly and anonymously make this go away by resolving the lawsuit by settling?
  • Or do you want to prepare to fight the lawsuit?
  • Should you file a motion to quash the subpoena
  • Ask every question that concerns you.

Our Utah local counsel is Byron L. Ames. Byron is admitted to practice in the United States District Courts of the District of Nevada, Central District of Utah, Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

Antonelli Law has represented over 1,500 clients who were in your shoes, finding themselves shocked to be involved in a federal copyright infringement movie file-sharing case.

Call us at 312-201-8310 or click here to Talk to a Lawyer For Free.  We will explain what the motion to quash the subpoena is about. Read more information about the LHF Productions Utah subpoenas below or fill out our contact form for a free lawyer consultation nationwide.

Name of ISP eg. Comcast

Party Suing or issuing subpeona (Plaintiff)

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

State (required)

Daytime Phone

Subject

Your Message

captcha

Like the first lawsuit, this second lawsuit goes after unnamed defendants in Salt Lake City but also ads far more individuals outside of Salt Lake City including Bountiful, Herryman, Layton, Kaysville, Layton , Lehi, North Salt Lake City, Ogden, Provo, Roy, Sandy City, and South Jordan.

The complaint alleges that the defendants used a BitTorrent or similar file-sharing program to obtain the movie “London Has Fallen” using SHA-1 Hash ID file: F57D4098BC49996D12F0D89858A1284E1FE1DDC7.

This is what clients say Antonelli Law is very good at:
  • Reducing your anxiety about the problem
  • Giving clear information to help you decide what to do
  • Responsive and accessible via phone and email
  • Tenacious and effective lawyers in lawsuit litigation

Call us for a free consultation at 312-201-8310 nationwide.

More About Our Utah Local Counsel

Byron Ames is a Managing Partner in his law firm Ames & Ames with offices in Kamas, Utah and Las Vegas, Nevada.  He is responsible for management of the Firm’s Utah  and Nevada offices. His practice includes all phases of general litigation and transactional work, with an emphasis in the transportation, hospitality and construction industries.

CONTACT US FOR A FREE ATTORNEY CONSULTATION (Click Here)

If you are the account holder for an internet account, your name is linked to an IP address. If you receive a letter from your internet service provider (ISP) such as Comcast, Cox Communications, or Century Link, which informs you a subpoena was received to reveal your identity, click here to learn about motions to quash or call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310 or use the contact form below.

Attorney Law’s attorneys are admitted to many federal courts from California to New York and in between. Attorney Jeffrey Antonelli is admitted to the District Court of Colorado, the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois, and many others and can appear in federal court anywhere in the country. Antonelli Law has defended more than 1,500 clients accused of BitTorrent copyright litigation since 2011.

Attorneys: Don’t risk malpractice trying to represent a client in a copyright lawsuit where the  loser pays statutory and attorneys fees. We accept attorney referrals and are very experienced in this specialized litigation.

More About BitTorrent Copyright Lawsuits in General

Click here for more information on the LHF Productions, Inc lawsuits. You may find it helpful to read the non-attorney blogs about these type of lawsuits by Fight Copyright Trolls and Die Troll Die. In particular, while not written by a lawyer, the post “Copyright Troll Poker” – OR How To Survive This Troll “No-Limit” Game may be very helpful to understand the psychology and monetary and legal risks of being a defendant.

RELATED POSTS

I received a Comcast letter and Subpoena – Help!

Introducing Our Local Counsel for Nevada & Utah BitTorrent Copyright Defense

More LHF Productions Inc Subpoenas in Colorado – Comcast Copyright Letters Coming

LHF Productions Subpoenas Arizona COX Communications Users

LHF Productions Lawsuits in Utah, Maryland, New York

 

 

Judge Allows LHF Productions Defendants to Proceed Anonymously

LHF Productions, Inc. the copyright holder for the movie “London Has Fallen” starring Morgan Freeman, Gerard Butler, and Aaron Eckhart is suing internet users in Illinois and other jurisdictions for allegedly downloading the film using file-sharing software over the internet in violation of the US Copyright Act. Right now, LHF Productions, Inc. are issuing subpoenas in Chicago, Illinois and many other jurisdictions.

In our recent post about LHF Productions Inc. v. Does 1-Does 1-24 (click here) in the Northern District of Illinois, one person who received a letter from Comcast about copyright infringement and a copy of the subpoena from LHF Productions, Inc. tried to prevent their identity from being revealed (rather than just their IP address) by filing a motion for a protective order with the court. Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer denied the motion (click here to see a copy of the court order).

We explained that although it was unclear why Judge Pallmeyer denied the motion, we speculated that  since the motion to deny was “without prejudice” we guessed the reason was because the person filed the motion without using their name. Courts ordinarily deny motions filed by people who do not reveal their identity, unless the motion is filed by an attorney.

However, in case number 16-cv-07680 LHF Productions Inc. v. Does 1-28, Judge John J. Tharp, Jr ordered that LHF Productions Inc “may not publish the identities of the Doe defendants in any way without further leave of court” and “Doe defendants may proceed in this case by pseudonym (based on their Doe numbers or IP addresses) until further order.” Click here to see a copy of the court order).

Quite a different view from one judge verses another judge. Other judges would not allow defendants to proceed anonymously unless the film was pornographic in nature.

According to Judge Tharpe, Jr “there remains a substantial possibility that the names turned over by ISPs will not accurately identify the individuals who actually downloaded or shared the copyrighted material” See his  July 2015 opinion in a lawsuit relating to Cobbler Nevada (click here for a copy of that Order), and referenced in his order above in the LHF Productions Inc. order.

In Cobbler Nevada v Does 1-29 16-cv-07680 Judge Tharpe, Jr stated:

there remains a substantial possibility that the names turned over by ISPs will not accurately identify the individuals who actually downloaded or shared the copyrighted material, see, e.g., Digital Sin, Inc. v. Does 1-176, 279 F.R.D. 239, 242 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (noting that the plaintiff there estimated that 30 percent of the individuals whose names were disclosed to plaintiffs did not download the copyrighted material). Balancing these concerns against the public’s interest in knowing the defendants’ true identities, the Court finds that allowing the defendants to proceed by pseudonym is appropriate at this preliminary stage of
the litigation, when no defendant has been put on notice of this suit. Once the defendants have received such notice, the Court will revisit the issue of whether the names of the defendants in this matter may be publicly disclosed.”

Call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310 if you received a LHF Productions, Inc. subpoena or were served a Summons in a LHF Productions, Inc. lawsuit, or click here to Talk to a Lawyer For Free.  We will explain what a motion to quash the subpoena is about. If you are the account holder for your internet account, your name is linked to an IP address which can be seen and tracked on the internet. We can tell you if the judge in your case will allow LHF productions defendants to proceed anonymously

Name of ISP eg. Comcast

Party Suing or issuing subpeona (Plaintiff)

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

State (required)

Daytime Phone

Subject

Your Message

captcha

Attorney Michal Hierl of the law firm Hughes Socol Piers Resnick Dym Ltd represents LHF Productions Inc and has issued subpoenas to ISPs including Comcast to reveal the names of the accountholders associated with the IP addresses it believes illegally downloaded the film “London Has Fallen” in violation of the US Copyright Act.

RELATED POSTS

LHF Productions Inc. Motion for Protective Order Denied

I received a Comcast letter and Subpoena – Help!

LHF Productions, Inc. to Ask Illinois Judges to Allow Comcast ISP Subpoenas

Illinois Judge Grants Request by LHF Productions Inc Lawsuit to Issue ISP Subpoenas to Reveal Names of People Who Allegedly Downloaded “London Has Fallen” Using BitTorrent

LHF Productions Inc. adds 315 Defendants in Illinois

#LHFProductions #LondonHasFallen

LHF Productions Inc Subpoenas Residents Accused of Downloading "London Has Fallen"
LHF Productions Inc Subpoenas Chicago Residents Accused of Downloading “London Has Fallen”

LHF Productions, Inc – Northern District of Illinois

LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-08403
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-08408
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-08410
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-08411
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-16 16-cv-08412
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-08413
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-08415
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-08416
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-08417
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-08419
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-34 16-cv-08422
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07673
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07674
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-33 16-cv-07675
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-07676
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-32 16-cv-07677
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07679
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07680
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07681
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-07684
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-07687
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07690
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-06796
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-06797
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-06798
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-06799
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-19 16-cv-06800
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-18 16-cv-06801
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-30 16-cv-06802
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-06803
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-06805
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-06806
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-39 16-cv-06808
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-06811
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-30 16-cv-04730
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-04731
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04732
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-19 16-cv-04733
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-04734
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-04740
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04741
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-04742
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04743
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-04744
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03903
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-03904
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03892
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-21 16-cv-03902
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-03896
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03899
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-03907
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-03897
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-03905
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-03887

If you receive a letter from  Comcast and a subpoena from LHF Productions Inc. to reveal your identity, call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310.

 

Judge Allows LHF Productions Defendants to Proceed Anonymously

LHF Productions Inc. Motion for Protective Order Denied

LHF Productions, Inc. the copyright holder for the movie “London Has Fallen” starring Morgan Freeman, Gerard Butler, and Aaron Eckhart is suing internet users in Illinois and other jurisdictions for allegedly downloading the film using file-sharing software over the internet in violation of the US Copyright Act. Right now, LHF Productions, Inc. are issuing subpoenas in Chicago, Illinois and many other jurisdictions.

One person who received a letter from Comcast about copyright infringement and a copy of the subpoena from LHF Productions, Inc. tried to prevent their identity from being revealed (rather than just their IP address) by filing a motion for a protective order with the court.

However, Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer denied the motion (click here to see a copy of the court order).  It is unclear why Judge Pallmeyer denied the motion. But since it was denied “without prejudice” we would guess the reason is because the person filed the motion without using their name, since keeping their name out of the public court record is the whole point of the motion and the courts ordinarily deny motions filed by people who do not reveal their identity.

To properly file a motion for a protective order to keep your name from being public, you most likely need to hire an attorney to do this. Practically speaking, the chances of a motion for a protective order being granted is very low for a non-pornographic movie lawsuit like this one by LHF Productions about the movie “London Has Fallen.”

If you receive an LHF Productions Inc subpoena, the best thing to do is to talk with an experienced lawyer.

  • Learn about what the notice means.
  • Do you want to quickly and anonymously make this go away by resolving the lawsuit by settling?
  • Or do you want to prepare to fight the lawsuit?
  • Should you file a motion to quash the subpoena
  • Ask every question that concerns you.

Call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310 if you received a LHF Productions, Inc. subpoena or were served a Summons in a LHF Productions, Inc. lawsuit, or click here to Talk to a Lawyer For Free.  We will explain what a motion to quash the subpoena is about. If you are the account holder for your internet account, your name is linked to an IP address which can be seen and tracked on the internet.

On August 29th, LHF Productions  filed an addition 11 copyright infringement lawsuits against 280 individuals in the Northern District of Illinois who are yet unnamed. In July, LHF Productions  filed 10 copyright infringement lawsuits against 269 individuals. In June,  LHF Productions  filed 12 copyright infringement lawsuits against against 315 individuals.

Attorney Michal Hierl of the law firm Hughes Socol Piers Resnick Dym Ltd represents LHF Productions Inc and has issued subpoenas to ISPs including Comcast to reveal the names of the accountholders associated with the IP addresses it believes illegally downloaded the film “London Has Fallen” in violation of the US Copyright Act.

CONTACT US FOR A FREE ATTORNEY CONSULTATION

If you are the account holder for an internet account, your name is linked to an IP address. If you receive a letter from  Comcast and a subpoena from LHF Productions Inc. to reveal your identity, call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310 about motions to quash the subpoena and other options, or use the contact form below.

Attorney Jeffrey Antonelli is admitted to the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois, and others, and can appear in federal court anywhere in the country. Antonelli Law has defended more than 1,500 clients accused of BitTorrent copyright litigation since 2011.

Attorneys: Don’t risk malpractice trying to represent a client in a copyright lawsuit where the  loser pays statutory and attorneys fees. We accept attorney referrals and are very experienced in this specialized litigation.

This is what clients say Antonelli Law is very good at:
  • Reducing your anxiety about the problem
  • Giving clear information to help you decide what to do
  • Responsive and accessible via phone and email
  • Tenacious and effective lawyers in lawsuit litigation

Call us for a free consultation at 312-201-8310 nationwide or use the contact form below.

Name of ISP eg. Comcast

Party Suing or issuing subpeona (Plaintiff)

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

State (required)

Daytime Phone

Subject

Your Message

captcha

LHF Productions, Inc – Northern District of Illinois

LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-08403
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-08408
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-08410
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-08411
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-16 16-cv-08412
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-08413
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-08415
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-08416
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-08417
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-08419
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-34 16-cv-08422
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07673
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07674
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-33 16-cv-07675
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-07676
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-32 16-cv-07677
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07679
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-07680
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07681
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-07684
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-07687
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-07690
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-06796
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-06797
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-06798
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-06799
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-19 16-cv-06800
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-18 16-cv-06801
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-30 16-cv-06802
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-06803
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-06805
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-06806
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-39 16-cv-06808
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-22 16-cv-06811
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-30 16-cv-04730
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-04731
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04732
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-19 16-cv-04733
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-04734
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-23 16-cv-04740
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04741
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-28 16-cv-04742
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-29 16-cv-04743
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-04744
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03903
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-24 16-cv-03904
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03892
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-21 16-cv-03902
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-03896
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-26 16-cv-03899
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-03907
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-27 16-cv-03897
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-31 16-cv-03905
LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-25 16-cv-03887

If you receive a letter from  Comcast and a subpoena from LHF Productions Inc. to reveal your identity, call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310.

LHF Productions Inc. Motion for Protective Order

RELATED POSTS

I received a Comcast letter and Subpoena – Help!

LHF Productions, Inc. to Ask Illinois Judges to Allow Comcast ISP Subpoenas

Illinois Judge Grants Request by LHF Productions Inc Lawsuit to Issue ISP Subpoenas to Reveal Names of People Who Allegedly Downloaded “London Has Fallen” Using BitTorrent

LHF Productions Inc. adds 315 Defendants in Illinois

LHF Productions Inc. Motion for Protective Order

#LHFProductions #LondonHasFallen

LHF Productions Inc Subpoenas Residents Accused of Downloading "London Has Fallen"
LHF Productions Inc Subpoenas Chicago Residents Accused of Downloading “London Has Fallen”

 

LHF Productions Subpoenas Arizona COX Communications Users

LHF Productions, Inc. the copyright holder for the movie “London Has Fallen” starring Morgan Freeman, Gerard Butler, and Aaron Eckhart is suing internet users in Arizona for allegedly downloading the film using file-sharing software over the internet in violation of the US Copyright Act. Right now, LHF Productions, Inc. subpoenas Arizona  internet users.

There are many LHF Productions, Inc. Lawsuits. Each lawsuit is filed in federal court and requests permission to find out the real names of internet users associated with IP addresses suspected of being part of the movie downloading.

This is done by sending a subpoena to your internet company (ISP). Right now, LHF Productions, Inc. subpoenas Arizona internet users. Most people find out they are involved in the lawsuit when they receive a letter from their internet company (ISP) such as COX Communications, Verizon, Comcast, or others informing them of the copyright infringement allegations.

If you receive a subpoena, the best thing to do is to talk with an experienced lawyer.

  • Learn about what the notice means.
  • Do you want to quickly and anonymously make this go away by resolving the lawsuit by settling?
  • Or do you want to prepare to fight the lawsuit?
  • Should you file a motion to quash the subpoena
  • Ask every question that concerns you.

Call Antonelli Law at 312-201-8310 if you received a LHF Productions, Inc. subpoena or were served a Summons in a LHF Productions, Inc. lawsuit, or click here to Talk to a Lawyer For Free.  We will explain what a motion to quash the subpoena is about. If you are the account holder for your internet account, your name is linked to an IP address which can be seen and tracked on the internet.

This is what clients say Antonelli Law is very good at:
  • Reducing your anxiety about the problem
  • Giving clear information to help you decide what to do
  • Responsive and accessible via phone and email
  • Tenacious and effective lawyers in lawsuit litigation

Call us for a free consultation at 312-201-8310 nationwide or use the contact form below.

Last month, Antonelli Law alerted Arizona residents using Cox Communications as their internet service that LHF Productions Inc. had begun suing people in Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal Counties for allegedly downloading the movie “London Has Fallen” illegally from the Internet.

On August 30th, LHF Productions Inc. sued another 23 residents in Phoenix, Tucson, Tempe, Mesa, Gilberts, Glendale, Buckeye, and Surprise.  LHF Productions inc. alleges that these COX users downloaded the movie between June 17, 2016 and July 7, 2016 using the hash files

  • SHA1: B92FD05A65F1BB38B24C99EBFB0803BE7F6DA0D4
  • SHA1: 632613270A1D1F66429CA070C9ED5CB980357471
  • SHA1: 5FD06ECEAD783738066F56B6F92CF62331797530

On September 21st, federal judge David G Campbell signed this order allowing LHF Productions Inc to send a subpoena to COX Communications to reveal the names of internet subscribers of certain IP addresses that were involved in illegal copying or file-sharing of their film “London Has Fallen” as alleged by LHF Productions Inc.

LHF Productions Inc. requests trial by jury, actual damages or statutory damages pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504, an injunction, attorneys fees, and other relief. Copyright infringement actions can result in statutory damages from between $750 and $150,000 plus attorneys fees.

CONTACT US FOR A FREE ATTORNEY CONSULTATION

If you received a subpoena from COX about this lawsuit we can answer all your questions at 312-201-8310. Attorney Jeffrey Antonelli owns Tucson area land and loves the beauty of Arizona. Antonelli Law has defended more than 1,500 clients nationwide who have been accused of BitTorrent copyright litigation since 2011, and we will explain each of your legal options as well as the risks and benefits of each.

We will explain what COX is talking about when it mentions a “motion to quash or vacate the subpoena” and more. 

CONTACT US FOR A FREE ATTORNEY CONSULTATION

Attorneys: Don’t risk malpractice in a copyright lawsuit where the  loser pays statutory and attorneys fees. We accept attorney referrals and are very experienced in this specialized litigation. If you have a potential client calling about LHF Productions Subpoenas refer them to Antonelli Law.

Name of ISP eg. Comcast

Party Suing or issuing subpeona (Plaintiff)

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

State (required)

Daytime Phone

Subject

Your Message

captcha

The best thing to do is to talk with an experienced lawyer.

  • Learn about what the notice means.
  • Do you want to quickly and anonymously make this go away by resolving the lawsuit by settling?
  • Or do you want to prepare to fight the lawsuit?
  • Should you file a motion to quash the subpoena?
  • Ask us every question that concerns you.

This is what clients say Antonelli Law is very good at:

  • Reducing your anxiety about the problem
  • Giving clear information to help you decide what to do
  • Responsive and accessible via phone and email
  • Tenacious and effective lawyers in lawsuit litigation

If you received an LHF Productions Inc Subpoena or were served a Summons, call us at 312-201-8310 or click here to Talk to a Lawyer For Free

District of Arizona

LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-13  2:16-cv- 02911

LHF Productions, Inc v. Does 1-10  2:16-cv- 02915

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02911

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02915

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02866

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02690

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02691

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02632

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02644

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02557

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-02550

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01556

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01474

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01471

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01469

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01472

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01194

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01199

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01200

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01196

LHF Productions Incorporated           2:2016-cv-01198

LHF Productions, Inc. is represented in Arizona by attorneys  Geoffrey S Kercsmar and Gregory Blain Collins of Kercsmar & Feltus PLLC of Scottsdale.

Antonelli Law can defend you nationwide if you have received an ISP letter informing you a subpoena for your identity was received, or if you are served with a summons or waiver of service.

LHF Productions inc v Does 1- Arizona
LHF Productions inc v Does 1- Arizona

RELATED POSTS

LHF Productions Inc. Lawsuits in Arizona Continue – Subpoenas Expected

Arizona Residents Targeted in LHF Productions Inc Downloading Lawsuits

Arizona Copyright Lawsuits – Is Three a Crowd?

More LHF Productions Inc Subpoenas in Colorado – Comcast Copyright Letters Coming

I received a Comcast letter and Subpoena – Help!

#LHFProductions

 

 

News and Opinions from Antonelli Law – Subpoena and Summons Help