Blog Updates
How the Ninth Circuit’s New Anti-SLAPP Appeal Rule Helps Plaintiffs in Federal California Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits
How the Ninth Circuit’s New Anti-SLAPP Appeal Rule Helps Plaintiffs in California Malicious Prosecution Lawsuits The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued a major decision that changes how appeals are handled for denials of anti-SLAPP motions in federal court. Previously, defendants in California lawsuits—including malicious prosecution cases—could appeal ...
TRIAL DATE
KATHERINE McNAMARA, et al. vs BREAKING CODE SILENCE, A CALIFORNIA 501(c) (3) NONPROFIT CORPORATION, et al. TRIAL DATE Trial Date: February 26, 2026 Time: 10:00 AM Location: SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE - SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Hearing Description: JURY TRIAL ...
A Plot To Sue? – The Extended Timeline
From the start of the federal action, Whiteley and McNamara have both contended that Breaking Code Silence’s Complaint was no more than judicial extortion and retaliation. Both Whiteley and McNamara believe that the Plaintiff’s allegations were a work of fiction designed to intimidate McNamara into surrendering a domain name ...
State Court Docket
CASE INFORMATION: 22STCV14977 Case Title: KATHERINE MCNAMARA, ET AL. VS BREAKING CODE SILENCE, A CALIFORNIA 501(C)(3) NONPROFIT CORPORATION, ET AL. Filing Courthouse: Spring Street Courthouse To view the state court docket, please go to this web address: Superior Court of Los Angeles | Access a case Then enter this ...
Breaking Code Silence USPTO Court Docket
USPTO DOCKET - Click on "Documents", then click on "Proceedings Documents. Date Document Description Summary of Document 6/5/25 PARTIES' CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JGT DENIED Summary coming soon 4/7/25 P REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION Summary coming soon 3/31/25 D OPP/RESP TO MOTION Summary coming soon 3/4/25 SUSP PEND DISP ...
Breaking Code Silence’s Failure To Pay Sanctions
As of May 9th, 2025, Breaking Code Silence has not paid any portion of the sanction awards totaling $66,217.33, nor has it proposed an acceptable payment plan to the court. Despite this situation, McNamara continues to allow her domain, www.breakingcodesilence.org, to redirect users to Breaking Code Silence's website. Breaking Code ...
CA Protects Survivors from Predatory Defamation Lawsuits Meant to Silence Them
CA Gov. Newsom Signs MeToo Bill AB 933, Protecting Survivors from Predatory Defamation Lawsuits Meant to Silence Them On October 10, 2023, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill (AB) No. 933. The new law provides further protection to individuals who are victims of sexual offenses and ...
9/17/24 – Order Denying Plaintiffs Motion for Payment Plan
Order Denying Plaintiffs Motion for Payment Plan 9/17/24 Below is the order of the Court denying Plaintiff's Motion for Payment Plan and Extension to Pay Discovery Sanctions Amount. The court did note that Breaking Code Silence did not follow its orders concerning the original Motion to Dismiss to ...
9/13/24 – Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Motion for Payment Plan
Plaintiff's Reply in Support of Motion for Payment Plan 9/13/24 Below is the Plaintiff's Reply in Support of Motion for Payment Plan and Extension to Pay Discovery Sanctions Amount. This is a reply to Whiteley and McNamara's opposition to their motion. The original motion only included a declaration ...
9/6/24 – Breaking Code Silence ordered to pay $34,986.50 in Sanctions
Breaking Code Silence ordered to pay $34,986.50 in Sanctions 9/6/24 On September 6th, 2024, the Court ruled on Whiteley and McNamara's Motion for Sanctions under Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures. Below is the entire order from the Court. Some notable quotes: "Although BCS now ...
8/28/24 – Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Payment Plan
Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Payment Plan and Extension to Pay Sanctions Amount 8/28/24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PAYMENT ...
8/26/24 – Plaintiff’s Motion for Payment Plan
Plaintiff's Motion for Payment Plan and Extension to Pay Discovery Sanctions Amount 8/26/24 Below is the Plaintiff's Reply in Support of Motion for Payment Plan and Extension to Pay Discovery Sanctions Amount [ECF 212] and the accompanying declaration by Magill. We want to briefly note why we chose to ...
8/15/24 – Declaration of Jennifer Magill – ECF 212
Declaration of Jennifer Magill RE: Service of Process Pursuant to ECF 212 8/15/24 Per the 7/25/24 order, Breaking Code Silence was ordered to serve all the organization's board members and officers with a copy of the sanctions order. Jenny Magill submitted the following declaration to show compliance. One ...
7/25/24 – Breaking Code Silence ordered to pay $15,342 in Sanctions
Breaking Code Silence ordered to pay $15,342 in Sanctions 7/25/24 Below is the order granting the Motion for Sanctions related to the Slack production. The Court ordered Breaking Code Silence to pay Whiteley and McNamara the sum of $15,342. Some notable quotes from the motion: "Here, it was ...
5/24/24 – Supplement to Notice of Motion and Motion for Sanctions
Supplement to Notice of Motion and Motion for Sanctions 5/24/24 Additional Information: Declaration of Adam Tate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 JOINT STIPULATION RE: ...
5/8/24 – Order Granting Request for Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice
Order Granting Request for Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice 5/8/24 Below is the order granting the voluntary dismissal with prejudice of the federal action. It should be noted that the Court chose not to adopt Breaking Code Silence's pretext for why they were dismissing the case in its order. ...
5/1/24 – DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REDUCE FEES AND COSTS
DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REDUCE FEES AND COSTS 5/1/24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO REDUCE FEES AND COSTS Dirk ...
5/1/24 – PLAINTIFF’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
PLAINTIFF’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO FRCP 41(a)(2) 5/1/24 Below is Breaking Code Silence's response to DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE. Some notable parts: Whiteley and McNamara noted in their response that the court had ordered BCS ...
4/25/24 – Supplemental Joint Stipulation RE: Motion to Compel
Supplemental Joint Stipulation RE: Attorney's Fees on Defendants Motion to Compel Slack Communications and for Sanctions 4/25/24 Below is the supplemental joint stipulation requested by the Court regarding Whiteley and McNamara's Motion to Compel and for Sanctions against Breaking Code Silence. 1 2 3 4 5 6 ...
4/24/24 – PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REDUCE DEFENDANTS’ REQUESTED ATTORNEYS’ FEE
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REDUCE DEFENDANTS’ REQUESTED ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS RELATED TO SUBPOENA DISCOVERY 4/24/24 PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REDUCE DEFENDANTS’ REQUESTED ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS RELATED TO SUBPOENA DISCOVERY CASE NO. 2:22-CV-002052-SB-MAA DLA PIPER LLP (US) WW W.D LA PI PE R.CO M 1 2 3 4 5 ...