May 21, 2010

Kronenberger Rosenfeld Secures Massive Attorneys’ Fees Order in Spam Lawsuit

By

On May 19, 2010 the Honorable Joseph C. Spero granted defendant Azoogleads.com, Inc.’s motion for attorneys’ fees against ASIS Internet services in the amount of $806,978.84. Renowned spam law firm, Kronenberger Rosenfeld, represented Azoogleads.com in this proceeding. In 2005, ASIS had initiated a lawsuit against 20 defendants, alleging that all of the defendants, including Azoogleads.com, had procured the sending of several thousand unlawful commercial emails in violation of CAN-SPAM, 15 U.S.C. §7701 et seq. and California Business & Professions Code section 17529.5. The district court granted summary judgment to Azoogleads.com, finding that the plaintiff had not suffered the necessary adverse effects to maintain a CAN-SPAM action and that the plaintiff had offered no evidence that Azoogleads.com had known about let alone procured the emails at issue in the lawsuit. Azoogleads.com subsequently moved the Court for an award of fees. The court granted Azoogleads.com’s motion, finding:

Here, the Court concludes that while ASIS may not have acted out of bad faith in initiating litigation against Azoogle, it at least acted unreasonably. Even assuming ASIS might have reasonably believed when it initially named Azoogle as a defendant that it would be able to establish standing – a question that turned on an as-yet unresolved issue of law – there was never any evidence that Azoogle sent or procured the emails on which ASIS based its claims. Rather, it is apparent that ASIS sued Azoogle based on little more than speculation that there might be a connection between those emails and Azoogle. ASIS then continued to litigate even as its discovery efforts turned up no evidence in support of its claims against Azoogle. Having initiated over 20 similar actions, and sued over 20 defendants in this action alone, an award of attorneys’ fees here is necessary to deter ASIS and other plaintiffs hoping to profit under the CAN-SPAM Act from casting such a wide net. The Court also concludes that an award of fees advances the interests of compensation to the extent that Defendant Azoogle was forced to defend itself against ASIS’s groundless claims, resulting in years of litigation and over a million dollars in attorneys’ fees.

ASIS Internet Services v. Optin Global, et al., Case No. 05-5124 (N.D. Cal.) [D.E. 483]

Click here to view the Court's order.

Related Topics

    Related Practice Areas



    Related articles

    Spam Law

    Internet Law Firm Secures Another Victory in Spam

    On March 19, 2009 the Honorable Maxine Chesney of the Northern District of California dismissed a spam lawsuit filed by Hypertouch, Inc. against Azoogle.com and several other Defendants. Azoogle was...

    Read Article

    Spam Law

    How Email Marketers Can Reduce the Risk of

    Due to restrictive interpretations of the 2013 CAN-SPAM Act over the last decade, many spam plaintiffs find it more convenient to bring lawsuits instead under the California anti-spam law (CASL)—which...

    Read Article

    Spam Law

    Consent Requirements for Federal Text (SMS) Message Spam

    The federal government is poised to implement new, stricter consumer consent rules designed to “further reduce the opportunities for telemarketers to place unwanted or unexpected calls to consumers.” The rules...

    Read Article

    Spam Law

    Firm Prevails on Summary Judgment Against Professional Spam

    On June 11, 2014, the firm prevailed on behalf of its client on its summary judgment motion in Alameda Superior Court in the case of Timothy Dewitt v. Devry University...

    Read Article
    Get the help you need.

    We offer legal advice on a wide range of online topics

    Get legal help now

    Not seeing what you’re looking for?

    Submit your case in 3 minutes and get legal help fast.

    Submit your case online

    OR

    Give us a call
    Join our mailing list

    Stay ahead of legal matters

    The internet moves fast. We'll keep you informed.