As promised previously, if I had an update on the Antara lawsuit dealing with the APE deal swing trade I would drop it hear for all of you. However I have to say this was not the update I expected to be giving. Saturday I checked up on the case again, as I had been off and on since it was first announced on Bloomberg Law. Much to my dismay the plaintiffs still hadn’t served Antara yet and it is coming up on a month since they filed the lawsuit.
That is pretty unusual as far as I’ve seen in the cases I’ve followed. I mean maybe if you are a pro se litigant, representing yourself and unaware of how the courts work, you might struggle with the process of process as it were, but these are suppose to be professional lawyers in the state of New York working in New York City. You have to be pretty good to make it there. So I decided on a whim to look into these lawyers and see what I could figure out about them.
After doing some research I managed to find both lawyers. If you are wondering why I’m using their Find Law profile instead of their website or something like that it is because they have none. There is no digital footprint other than this for either of these lawyers. No website, no reviews, no real logging of their case history nothing. Once I noticed that they are personal practice lawyers, meaning it is a “law office” of one, that makes sense. I mean Mr. Lopez doesn’t even have a physical address listed, just a PO Box and Mrs. Tauber lists here personal address as the address of her office.
This would all be fine for someone who is on personal retainer for someone maybe, but this is supposedly a commercial/securities litigation. That is some pretty intricate law that would require some form of staff more than likely, especially if you are going to take on corporations with a whole army of lawyers and resources. This whole thing was starting to not make a whole lot of sense. Looking for more clues, I saw that there were three cases on Mrs. Tauber’s Law360. Two of them were corporate litigations…
…then I realized I have PACER. So I quickly slapped those cases into a party search on PACER and went to look at the docket for both of those cases. This is what I found:
Both of these cases had an issue with service by the plaintiffs. Both also have a Donoghue as a plaintiff, but I cannot independently confirm if they are related to the Donoghue in the Antara case. Both have different first names and I don’t have the research tools to pursue that lead any further (and as we will see soon enough I don’t think that is necessary). In both cases after trying and failing to serve, even trying to get the court to grant a Rule 4(d) waiver of service request and failing, the cases were voluntarily dismissed. Also something else amusing popped up in both of those cases:
Oh hey look it is our good friend David Lopez. Now I was highly suspicious of the situation. Two private practice lawyers working together on cases that were more and more looking like fishing expeditions. So that is when I decided, since I have PACER, I can search by both lawyers names under a party search just like I looked for these cases and get their whole federal case history in the state of New York. Jackpot. It was here where I found exactly what I expected. both Mr. Lopez and Mrs. Tauber have an extensive case history of frivolous lawsuits. File, fail to serve, and then dismiss. They all have similar plaintiffs, which suggests that they have people they know that they can use as plaintiffs to file these frivolous cases. Mrs. Tauber has two pages of cases going back as far as ten years. Mr. Lopez, who has been practicing law much longer, has ten pages and has 20+ years of this kind of litigation. I just stopped looking through the search around 2000.
That being said there are a few cases here or there for a both of them that do go on, but those are the exceptions and not the rule. This whole operation is a giant legal fishing game. Put in as little effort as possible and hope you can scare the defendant into doing something while exerting no legal resources. After all you are one person or well two and not very likely to win against an actual law firm who has the time and resources to chew you up and spit you out. That one real case or settlement can make you while the rest of these are just water under the bridge. What is so silly and makes me feel so stupid is that it was so obvious. The evidence of Mr. Lopez and Mrs. Tauber’s tactics were in plain sight the whole time for anyone to see if they cared to look just a slight bit closer. Research that not even Bloomberg even bothered to conduct. There is still a chance maybe that these are one of those cases that this duo would pursue, but I wouldn’t hold my breath. If this was a case they wanted to chase they would have already filed service by now. I have a pretty good feeling that they will let this case die and voluntarily dismiss it like the others, but I’ll keep watching occasionally just in case.