Below is all the email that I (Al Petrofsky) have sent to Jeff Merkey
or received from him, through 2006-09-21. Also included is a
2005-06-23 email from law clerk Susie Hindley (which is addressed only
to me, but is in reply to an email for which I had included Merkey on
the CC list).
For more information
see http://scofacts.org/merkey.
Technical Notes: In most instances in which an email included the entire text of another email, that has been excised. Also, I believe that the emails appear here in the order that they were sent, even though there are some cases of a Merkey email dated a little earlier than the email that precedes it. For example, his first email titled "Re: Belatedly sealed document in Merkey v. Perens" is a reply to the email that precedes it, and thus could not possibly have been sent before the preceding email, even though this reply is dated June 23 09:41 -0600 (= 15:41 UTC), which is ten minutes before the preceding email's Date, 08:51 -0700 (= 15:51 UTC). It appears that his clock was an hour behind.
------
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:01:49 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: al@scofacts.org
Subject: Criminal Contempt
Message-ID: <42B9EDDD.7060302@utah-nac.org>
Hey Al,
You have copies of the Novell settlement agreement posted on your
site. I have downloaded an forwarded links and hosting information
to Judge Kimball's Clerks. There is an order sealing these
documents (the complaint is OK). I have notified the Court you are
distributing copies in violation of Judge Kimballs order. Go check
PACER.
I advise you to take down the documents immediately.
Jeff
------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 08:51:39 -0700
From: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
To: Susie Hindley <Susie_Hindley@utd.uscourts.gov>
CC: Jeff Merkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>,
Jim F Lundberg <jflundberg@novell.com>
Subject: Belatedly sealed document in Merkey v. Perens
Message-Id: <200506231551.IAA15945@radish.petrofsky.org>
Dear Ms. Hindley:
I understand you are the law clerk assigned to Judge Kimball's
odd-numbered cases. One of those cases is Merkey v. Perens et al.,
2:05-cv-00521-DAK, which was filed late on Tuesday (June 21).
The second exhibit to the complaint is a copy of a 1998 settlement
agreement between Merkey, Novell, Inc., and some other parties.
I am not a party to the settlement agreement nor to the Merkey
v. Perens action. I am, however, in the habit of collecting some
documents of interest to people following the litigation efforts of
the SCO Group, Inc.. I make such documents publicly available on the
scofacts.org internet website. (The SCO Group is also not a party to
the Merkey case, but it is connected to the case by, among other
things, the plaintiff's allegations on pages 18-22 of the complaint.)
On Wednesday morning, I obtained copies of the Merkey complaint and
its exhibits from the court's ECF system. I then placed them at the
following locations:
http://scofacts.org/Merkey-Perens-1.pdf (the complaint)
http://scofacts.org/Merkey-Perens-1_1.pdf (exhibits 1 and 2)
I mentioned their locations on two public message systems, and the
exhibits have subsequently been downloaded by visitors from over a
hundred different internet addresses around the world.
I notice that on Wednesday afternoon, Judge Kimball entered an order
that reads:
Plaintiff filed a Verified Complaint in this matter on June 21,
2005, including a confidential settlement agreement as Exhibit 2 to
the Verified Complaint. Plaintiff notified the court that he
intended to file this exhibit under seal. However, because it was
not filed according to the court's rules regarding sealed documents,
the exhibit was scanned into the court's public electronic docket.
Pursuant to paragraph 6 of the settlement agreement, the parties
agreed that the settlement agreement was confidential. Therefore,
the court hereby seals Exhibit 2 of the Verified Complaint in this
matter and directs the Clerk of Court to remove the exhibit from the
court's electronic docket.
I have received, apparently from Jeff Merkey, an email titled
"Criminal Contempt", which states that "I have notified the Court you
are distributing copies in violation of Judge Kimballs order". (The
full text of the email is below.)
I notice, however, that the order, as written, is directed solely at
the Clerk of Court, and not at me.
Please let me know if the court intends to enter an order that would
forbid my distribution of this document.
Yours truly,
Alan P. Petrofsky
------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 09:41:19 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Cc: Susie Hindley <Susie_Hindley@utd.uscourts.gov>,
Jim F Lundberg <jflundberg@novell.com>
Subject: Re: Belatedly sealed document in Merkey v. Perens
In-Reply-To: <200506231551.IAA15945@radish.petrofsky.org>
Message-ID: <42BAD81F.6020807@utah-nac.org>
All,
After leaving Mr. Petrofsky a message last night, he continued to
dsitribute these documents and subsequently posted them to a site in
the counrty of Checkoslovakia. He and his associates then created
links on Groklaw and continued to distribute copies. I have snapshots
of the text, comments, and downloads from al and others assisting in
violating the courts order. I am preparing an ex-parte motion for TRO
against al, groklaw, and his conspirators for an order requiring that
they remove this content and asking the court to prohibit these sites
from using any court pleadings obtained from PACER for any pending
cases until the cases have been adjudicated. These internet sites
have conspired with individuals in communist countries and have
assisted delberately in the violation of the courts order.
Al is simply a liar, and I will file the evidence next week with the
Court detailing his actions and those of his associates.
Sincerely,
Jeff
------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 09:45:50 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
Cc: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>,
Susie Hindley <Susie_Hindley@utd.uscourts.gov>,
Jim F Lundberg <jflundberg@novell.com>
Subject: Re: Belatedly sealed document in Merkey v. Perens
In-Reply-To: <42BAD81F.6020807@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <42BAD92E.6040403@utah-nac.org>
These people are roosting like vultures in the trees outside the US
Courthouse waiting to pounce on any information for dissemination.
These people are not attorneys, parties to the action, or even have
any real interest in these cases other than to promote their websites.
None of these people involved in these actions, inclduing al, are
legitimate reporters or news agencies. It should be clear to the
Court and others that their purpose, as stated in the original
complaint, is to seize and funnel sensitive information into the hands
of enemies of the United States and those acting in concert with them
to violate the rights of American Citizens and companies like Novell.
Sincerely,
Jeff
------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:11:06 -0600
From: Susie_Hindley@utd.uscourts.gov
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Subject: Re: Belatedly sealed document in Merkey v. Perens
In-Reply-To: <200506231551.IAA15945@radish.petrofsky.org>
Message-ID: <OF3B904711.3837E7AF-ON87257029.005BE474-87257029.005E969F@uscmail.uscourts.gov>
Mr Petrofsky:
There is no present motion or case before Judge Kimball regarding
the use of or dissemination of Exhibit 2 to the Complaint filed in Merkey
v. Perens, 2:05cv521DAK. Procedurally and factually I can't tell you much
more than what was contained in the Order issued by Judge Kimball
yesterday. Mr. Merkey did not file Exhibit 2 in accordance with the
court's procedures and the Exhibit ended up on the court's electronic
docket as you are aware. However, the document is confidential and
clearly states that it is confidential. Therefore, it has been taken off
of the court's electronic docket and is and will remain under seal at the
court. The court cannot opine on the legal consequences of what happened
or what you are doing unless there is a motion or case before it. Such an
opinion would go to the substance of a legal issue, which the court cannot
address in an ex parte context.
Susie Inskeep Hindley
Law Clerk to the Honorable Dale A. Kimball
United States District Court, District of Utah
350 South Main Street, #222
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
(801) 524-6612
------
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:35:22 -0700
From: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
To: Jim F Lundberg <jflundberg@novell.com>,
Jeff Merkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
CC: Susie Hindley <Susie_Hindley@utd.uscourts.gov>
Subject: Re: Belatedly sealed document in Merkey v. Perens
In-reply-to: <200506231551.IAA15945@radish.petrofsky.org>
Message-Id: <200506240035.RAA21530@radish.petrofsky.org>
Gentlemen,
In consideration of the apparent desire by Novell, Darren Major, and
Larry Angus that the terms of the agreement not become widely known, I
have ceased distributing the settlement agreement that was entered
into between and among them and Jeffrey Merkey and Timpanogas Research
Group on August 18, 1998, and was attached as Exhibit 2 to the
Complaint filed on June 21, 2005 in Merkey v. Perens, 2:05-cv-00521 in
the District of Utah.
While it was available at http://scofacts.org/Merkey-Perens-1_1.pdf,
it was retrieved by visitors from approximately 140 different internet
addresses. Obviously, any one of those visitors could possibly
redistribute the document to thousands of other readers. The same
goes for all the other people who, as I did, obtained the document
directly from the court's website before it was sealed. Like the
court, all I can do is cease my own distribution.
Yours truly,
Alan P. Petrofsky
------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:10:01 -0600
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@soleranetworks.com>
To: al@scofacts.org
Subject: Posting of Private emails
Message-ID: <42E50ED9.6010005@soleranetworks.com>
Al,
It's a violation of privacy laws to post private emails without the
consent of the author. You are only making matters
worse by posting this on your site.
http://scofacts.org/Merkey-email.txt
Jeff
------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:23:40 -0700
From: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
To: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@soleranetworks.com>
Subject: Re: Posting of Private emails
In-reply-to: <42E50ED9.6010005@soleranetworks.com>
Message-Id: <200507260223.TAA32073@radish.petrofsky.org>
Dear Mr. Merkey:
I do not believe that my publication of the unsolicited emails that
you have sent me is in any way illegal or tortious.
Furthermore, please be explicitly advised that I have no interest in
engaging in any form of private communication with you, and that I
will feel free to share with the public any communications I receive
from you.
Yours truly,
Alan P. Petrofsky
------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:39:49 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Subject: Re: Posting of Private emails
In-Reply-To: <200507260223.TAA32073@radish.petrofsky.org>
Message-ID: <42E59465.6040204@utah-nac.org>
The attached communication is priviliged and confidential.
It is a violation of privacy laws to post private emails. You also
solicited the emails by distributing sealed documents
and responding to me via email.
Jeff
------
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:43:31 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
Cc: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Subject: Re: Posting of Private emails
In-Reply-To: <42E59465.6040204@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <42E59543.4020808@utah-nac.org>
This email is privileged and confidential.
Copyright 2004, 2005 Al Petrofsky. All parties are granted license to
copy, modify, etc., this work according to the terms of the Creative
Commons <http://creativecommons.org> Attribution 2.0 Public License
<http://scofacts.org/ccl-by-2.0.html>.
See above. You are also engaging in conversion by posting my private
emails under this license -- you have no rights from me to do so.
Jeff
------
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:38:21 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Subject: So you don't have to wait for it to show up on pacer.
In-Reply-To: <42BAD81F.6020807@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <42FA81DD.6020500@utah-nac.org>
Al,
So you don;t have to wait for it to show up and pacer, and so you
have the Open Office Template for the lawsuit. Thanks for filing,
now I don't have to serve you.
Jeff
[attachment: reply-memo-expedite-1.sxw]
------
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 14:44:53 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Subject: Regular Mail is Fine
In-Reply-To: <42FA81DD.6020500@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <42FBB8C5.4020409@utah-nac.org>
Al,
Regarding your pleadings. You don't have to send them certified
mail. You can use regular mail unless you are serving someone. I
sent you copies of the pleadings priority mail, BTW. You just need
to make certain you have filed the cetificate of service with the
court, this is the only document that really matters for normal
pleadings.
I will be filing a Motion for Summary Judgment against you on
September 9, 2005. I can dismiss you out of the Suit if you want to
agree to a stipulation, or I can move for Summary Judgment, or we
can take it to trial -- up to you. There will be issues in the
State Court and you may have to appear there, but a lot of this is
still up in the air. You are free to call and conference with me on
this case pursuant to Rule 408 (Settlement discussions) at your
conveniance, or we can let the Court handle the matter -- either way
works for me.
Jeff
------
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 16:45:13 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Subject: Rule 4 Notice of Alternate Service
In-Reply-To: <42FBB8C5.4020409@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <43275679.8060508@utah-nac.org>
Dear Mr. Petrofsky,
I received your letter demanding a stamped envelope. I believe one
was mailed to you. If you were unable to find it, you may send mye
the waiver regular mail, and I will reimburse your .37 stamp for
you. You already have my address.
If you fail to send the waiver as required by Rule 4, I will hire a
process server and I will have you billed for the process of
service. You can also call for my FEDEX account number and send me
the waiver via FEDEX and have FEDEX call me directly and I will
provide them either a credit card for billing of the postage or my
FEDEX account number. If 30 days elapse, I will have you served and
sanctioned.
Jeff
------
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:24:53 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Cc: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
Subject: Re: Rule 4 Notice of Alternate Service
In-Reply-To: <43275679.8060508@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <43276DD5.4010706@utah-nac.org>
I've been getting a lot of images and strong impressions from you lately
and circumstances surrounding you. That's how I knew. I don't always
ask to see a lot of the things I do, then just come to me. It's time we
talked. Please call me if you get a chance. I think we understand
each other a little better know -- at least I understand you a better
than I did before.
You have my number. You are not alone in this situation over this
lawsuit. Even the person on the other side has a lot of sympathy.
Jeff
------
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 09:40:54 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>, pj@groklaw.com
Subject: Notice of Dismissal
In-Reply-To: <43275679.8060508@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <43317F06.2070001@utah-nac.org>
Dear Al and PJ.
I would recommend that you remove some of the more litigious materials
from your sites that would indicate harassment and stalking. I am now
pursuing criminal sanctions. I have dismissed both of you from the
pending Federal Case.
Sincerely,
Jeff V. Merkey
------
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2005 09:38:55 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
Cc: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>, pj@groklaw.com
Subject: Re: Notice of Dismissal
In-Reply-To: <43317F06.2070001@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <4334218F.8080509@utah-nac.org>
Al,
If you want me to file the dismissal, please remove the word "lunatic"
from your site and all private emails and recordings.
Thanks
Jeff
------
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 14:16:58 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>
Subject: Re: Notice of Dismissal
In-Reply-To: <43317F06.2070001@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <433AFA3A.5080304@utah-nac.org>
And Al,
I would suggest taking down the content on your site. I doubt you would
want me posting a site that states you are sperm guzzling faggot to the
whole planet, now would you? BTW, how are those AIDs medications
working out for you? How long do you have left?
Jeff
------
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 14:41:55 -0600
From: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
To: jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>
Cc: Alan P Petrofsky <al@petrofsky.org>, pj@groklaw.com
Subject: Re: Notice of Dismissal
In-Reply-To: <43317F06.2070001@utah-nac.org>
Message-ID: <433C5193.6000103@utah-nac.org>
Al,
You really need to stop banging on the hornets nest down in Provo.
Couple of things:
1. Filings in Court are privileged. There's no breach based on those
filings. The agreement also allowed for it and this language was placed
there by Novell in the event THEY wanted to challenge me based on future
events in Court. Filing the agreement under seal and referncingn
provisions of the agreement in public filings in a general way is allowed.
2. The Court posted the document on PACER, not me. I filed it with
cover sheet, and listed in the complaint as sealed. I also gave it to
the clerk. I did not scan it on the internet. Sealed documents get
scanned by mistake once in a while, and the Court is well aware of this
as is Novell. That's what sealing orders or for -- to make people take
them down and not hand them out.
3. A Federal Judge placed that document under seal. You are subject to
the order because you know about it, and you have received notice of the
action via certified mail.
4. You are the only person making threats to distribute the document
and pass it out. What you are really trying to do is rile Novell into
coming after me, and this is why you are making the threats. Everyone
on the planet can see this. They most probably are not going to. Why?
I cannot tell you why because it's none of your business, but they don't
want any publicity from this situation nor do they want it busting open
publically. There are reasons for this which you are not privy to.
5. Keep going. Once you make them mad, they are nasty characters to
contend with. My earlier communications to you were a warning about
what these people are capable of doing. You cna mischaracterize them
all you want -- I was trying to help you.
Good luck.
Jeff
------
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 00:53:01 -0700
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com>
To: al@scofacts.org
Subject: Received Notiication You Were Served
Message-ID: <439A895D.5060007@wolfmountaingroup.com>
Al,
I received confirmation of service this morning. I trust you found the
summons correct this time? The bill is $135.00 total.
See you in District Court. You may want to take the emails,
settlement, and libel off your site before we get too far into it,
a competent attorney will probably advise you to do so in any event.
See you in Utah.
You may call and discuss settlement (less the distribution of the
settlement agreement, I cannot do anything about that
one -- that one's up to the Court).
Jeff
------
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 20:10:51 -0600
From: "Jeffrey V. Merkey" <jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com>
To: al@scofacts.org
Subject: Compliance with District Court Order
Message-ID: <4513462B.8060301@wolfmountaingroup.com>
Dear Mr. Petrofsky,
You have been served in the matter 2:05cv521 and you have been ORDERED
to immediately remove the Novell Settlement Agreement from your website.
The Court also found the posting to the docket of the Court from which
you obtained the agreement was erroneous and released me from any
liablity for your actions. Your arguments were all ruled to be
unpersuasive and not founded in law.
I am considering an additional lawsuit for damages for distributing the
agreement. Your prompt compliance and removal of all content
about me on your site will limit these damages and possibly avert me
fromtaking these actions. The Court will be mailing you a copy of the
order. Your compliance must be immediate.
Sincerely,
Jeff V. Merkey
------
$Id: Merkey-email.html,v 1.4 2006/09/25 03:31:34 al Exp $