Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Project Honey Pot v. Does, 11cv15 (E.D. Va.; May 21, 2012)

Project Honey Pot v. Does, 11cv15 (E.D. Va.; May 21, 2012)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,206|Likes:
Project Honey Pot loses on jurisdictional grounds against off-shore banks.
Project Honey Pot loses on jurisdictional grounds against off-shore banks.

More info:

Published by: Venkat Balasubramani on May 24, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

09/05/2013

pdf

text

original

 
INTHEUNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURTFORTHEEASTERN
DISTRICT
OFVIRGINIA
AlexandriaDivision
if
PROJECTHONEY
POT,
et
al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JOHN
DOES,
et
al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUMOPINION
OnDecember
2,
2011,theCourtdismissedwithoutprejudice
defendants
DnBNordBanka
and
ZAORaiffeisenbank
("DnBNord"
and
"Raiffeisenbank")forlackofpersonaljurisdiction,
and
on
April
9,
2012,
the
Court
closed
this
civil
action.Plaintiffs
have
now
filedaMotionto
Alter
Judgment
Dismissing
Defendants
DnBNordBankandRaiffeisenbank
[Dkt.
No.
128],
inwhichthey
asktheCourtto
vacate
theOrdergrantingthebanks'motionsto
dismiss,denythosemotions,andreopenthiscivilaction.TheCourtdeniedplaintiffs'motioninopencourtonMay
11,
2012.
ThisMemorandumOpinionsupplementstheCourt'sreasoning
alreadyarticulated
on
the
record.
I.
BACKGROUND
ThecomplaintallegesthatinOctober
2007,
plaintiffJohn
Doe,
a
resident
of
Arlington,Virginia,
attemptedtobuya
prescriptiondrugthroughanonlinepharmacycalled"Canadian
Pharmacy."SecondAm.Compl.("Compl.")Uf21-22.Hewas
1:11CV15
(LMB/JFA)
MAY
2I
2012
_
ALEXANDRIA,
VIRGINIA
|
 
 
chargedforhispurchase
andpaid
forit
by
debitcardbut
receivednomedicationinthemailaspromised.
Id.
f
24.
Doe
sufferedno
financialloss
because
his
bankcreditedhim
the
amount
chargedandassigned
him
a
new
debit
card
number;
however,
sincethattransaction,
Doe
has
received
voluminous
spam
email.
Id.
fH25-26.
PlaintiffProject
Honey
Potisaspam-trackingnetworkthat
"allows
spammers,
phishers,
and
othere-criminals
to
be
tracked
throughouttheirentire'spamlifecycle.'"Compl.
fl
16.
ProjectHoneyPotclaimstohavereceivedspamfromtheonline
pharmaciesassociated
with
theindividualdefendants
or
their
purportedco-conspirators.
Id.
W
43-44.InadditiontoplaintiffsJohnDoeandProjectHoney
Pot,
thecomplaintseeks
to
establish
a
plaintiffclass
"of
all
individuals
in
the
United
Stateswhousedadebitorcreditcardtopurchaseorattemptto
purchasemedicationsonlineatwebsitescontrolledbythe
PharmacyDefendants,
and
theircardissuingbanks."Id.U
58.
Plaintiffs
havenotmovedforclass
certification.
Plaintiffshavebroughtthisactionagainsttwoindividual
defendantslocatedin
Russia,
BorisLivshitsandAndrey
Chernuk,1
whoplaintiffsallegeoperateillegalonlinepharmaciesunder
1In
the
complaint,
plaintiffs
refer
to
Livshits
and
Chernuk,
in
additionto"unnamedco-conspirators"
with
whom
Livshits
and
Chernukarepurportedtobeconspiringtorunillegalonlinepharmacies,asthe"PharmacyDefendants."Compl.
^
30.
Plaintiffsusetheterm"PharmacyDefendants"extremely
broadly.
 
 
various
trade
names.
Id.
^
30.2
According
to
thecomplaint,
thesepharmaciesarenotlicensedtosellprescriptiondrugs,donotrequirecustomerstohaveavalidprescription,andinduce
customersto
buy
counterfeitmedicationsthrough
false
advertising.
Id.
HH
44,
47.
Theconspiracyreliesonuseof
theVisacardnetworktoobtainpaymentsfromcustomers.
Id.
HH
48-50.
Accordingly,
the
remainder
ofthedefendantsin
this
actionwere
six
banks
based
inEurope,Asia,
and
theCaribbean,
whichallegedly"provide[]merchantaccountcardprocessing
servicestothePharmacyDefendants."
Id.
fl
31.3
Plaintiffs
2As
early
as
the
December
2,
2011hearing,
plaintiffs'
counsel
indicatedthatLivshits
may
"also
[be]
a
victim
inthiscase"
ratherthanimplicatedasanoperatorofanillegalpharmacy.
See
Dec.2,
2011
Tr.at13:8-10.
Consistent
with
this
view,
plaintiffsvoluntarily
dismissed
Livshitsin
March
2012.
3
Plaintiffsallege
that
the
defendantbanksare"acquiring
banks,"meaningthattheyprovidecreditcardprocessing
servicestomerchantssothatthemerchantscanacceptcredit
cardpaymentsfromcustomers.Thereisnosuggestionthatthe
defendantbankshaveactuallyissuedthecreditcardsusedby
consumersintheonlinepharmacypurchases.
Therelationshipbetweenissuingandacquiringbankshasbeen
describedas
follows:
The
Visa
andMasterCard
networks
are
similar.Issuer
banks...
issue
credit
cards
to
consumers.
Acquirer
banks...processpaymentsforthemerchants
who
make
credit-card
sales.
When
a
consumermakes
a
credit-card
purchase,themerchantswipesthecard,sendinga
messagetotheacquirerbank.Theacquirerbankthen
contactsthe
issuerbank
todeterminewhether
sufficient
credit
exists
intheaccount.Ifso,the
issuer
bank
clears
the
transaction,
relays
the
message
to
the
acquirer
bank,
whichnotifiesthe
merchant.
On
 

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Chitra Surya liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->