1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO

______________________________________

MELODY JOY CANTU AND DR. RODRIGO 

CANTU,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DR. SANDRA GUERRA and DIGITAL 

FORENSICS CORPORATION, LLC,

Defendants.

5:20-CV-0746-JKP

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

______________________________________

Plaintiffs Dr. Rodrigo Cantu and Melody Joy Cantu (“Melody Cantu”), altogether the 

(“Cantus”), through their attorneys, complain as follows:

Introduction

1. This is an action for violations of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 

U.S.C. § 1030 et. seq. (“CFAA”), the Federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et. seq., the Texas 

Harmful Access by Computer Act (“HACA”), Texas Penal Code § 33.02(b-1) (1), and the Texas 

torts of malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

2. Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra (“Dr. Guerra”) and Digital Forensics Corporation, 

LLC (“DFC”) hacked, surveilled, and damaged Plaintiffs’ protected computers and computer 

networks without authorization or effective consent, and intentionally damaged those computers 

and networks causing losses greater than $5,000. Defendants’ goal was the malicious prosecution 

of Plaintiff Melody Cantu and the Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress upon Plaintiffs, and 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 1 of 22
2

they succeeded. Defendants got Melody Cantu arrested right before a scheduled holiday trip with 

her husband and children, on charges eventually dismissed on speedy trial grounds. This was 

followed by Dr. Guerra’s filing of a false Child Protective Services complaint against Plaintiffs as 

part of her outrageous, jealous, and obsessive stalking campaign to intentionally inflict emotional 

distress upon Plaintiffs and their family.

3. Defendant Dr. Guerra’s obsessive jealousy motivated her revenge on her exhusband and his new wife, even though it was Dr. Guerra who divorced Dr. Cantu in 2009 after 

she began having an affair with another man.

4. Roughly two years later, Dr. Cantu met Melody Cantu, marrying her and triggering 

Defendant Dr. Guerra’s stalking and harassment of Plaintiffs, including the weaponization of Dr. 

Guerra’s and Dr. Cantu’s children against Dr. Cantu through parental alienation.

5. Defendant Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC’s (“DFC”) motivation was money. 

Having sold Dr. Guerra a Phase I report after Dr. Guerra turned to them to hack Plaintiffs, DFC,

like it always tries to do with its customers, upsold Dr. Guerra by urging her to file a police report 

in order to get DFC’s “Phase II” report. Police officer body camera footage of Dr. Guerra making 

her false police report, records her telling the officer that Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

requires her to file a police report to proceed with their services.

6. The Defendants campaign of hacking, surveillance, damage, and malicious 

prosecution is part of a stalking campaign against Plaintiffs to intentionally inflict emotional distress 

upon the Cantus, resulting in emotional and monetary harm including costs and expenses from 

computer and network downtime, bandwidth disruption, and computer intrusion investigation and 

amelioration. Thus, they seek compensatory, consequential, and punitive damages.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 2 of 22
3

The Parties

7. Plaintiffs Melody and Dr. Rodrigo Cantu are married U.S. citizens who reside in 

Boerne, Texas.

8. Defendant Dr. Sandra Guerra is a natural person who, upon information and belief, 

resides in San Antonio, Texas.

9. Defendant Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC (“DFC”) is, upon information and 

belief, a national Ohio based Limited Liability Company, with an office at 1100 NW Loop 410, 

#700, San Antonio, Texas 78213.1 Its website advertises it as an expert in “Digital Forensic 

Services,” and “Cyber Security Services,” among other things.2 The Better Business Bureau website 

contains an alert for DFC, noting a pattern of complaints against the company “concerning 

misrepresentation by the company regarding Phase 1 and Phase 2 reporting. These complaints allege 

that the consumer was led to believe that additional evidence, email, photos, or other information 

would be able to be produced if the consumer paid the additional money for Phase 2 reporting.”3

Jurisdiction and Venue

10. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

(“CFAA”) claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332, as the claims are federal questions under the 

CFAA, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(2)(C) (prohibiting unauthorized access to a computer), 

1030(a)(5)(A)-(C) (prohibiting unauthorized damage to a computer), 1030(g) (creating civil cause 

 

1 Digital Forensics Corp. San Antonio, TX, DIGITAL FORENSICS CORPORATION, 

https://www.digitalforensics.com/locations/tx/san-antonio (last accessed July 15, 2020).

2 Id.

3 Better Business Bureau, "Digital Forensics Corp.,"

https://www.bbb.org/us/oh/beachwood/profile/forensic-computers/digital-forensics-corp-0312-

92018715 (last accessed July 15, 2020).

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 3 of 22
4

of action), 1030(c)(4)(A)(i)(I) (creating civil jurisdiction predicate for CFAA losses aggregating 

$5,000 or more), and 1030(e) (defining “loss,” “damage,” and other key terms). As alleged below, 

the actions complained of resulted in CFAA loss of more than $5,000, all within the last two years 

from the date of the original Complaint.

11. Likewise, this Court has federal question jurisdiction over the Federal Wire Tap 

claims, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et. seq., under 18 U.S.C. § 2520(a) (providing a private right of action 

for victims of wiretapping).

12. For the Texas State Law claims, this Court has supplemental jurisdiction under 28 

U.S.C. § 1367. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001 provides for a civil cause of action for 

violations of the Texas Harmful Access by Computer Act (“HACA”), Texas Penal Code § 33.02(b1) (1). Texas courts recognize the torts of malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of 

emotional distress.

13. The Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because Dr. Guerra resides 

in the jurisdiction and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC conducts business in the jurisdiction 

through its San Antonio, TX division and office.

14. Venue is proper in the Western Division of Texas under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) 

because the Defendants reside and/or conduct business in this judicial district and the events 

complained of substantially occurred in this District.

Facts

15. Plaintiffs, husband and wife Dr. David Rodrigo and Melody Cantu, live in Boerne, 

Texas. Dr. Cantu works at a local medical practice, and Melody Cantu works for USAA.

16. In 2009, after 10 years of marriage, Dr. Guerra divorced Dr. Cantu after she began 

having an affair with another man.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 4 of 22
5

17. Dr. Cantu had 2 daughters with Dr. Guerra during their marriage, currently ages 18

and 17, with whom he shared custody.

18. Roughly two years after his divorce with Defendant Dr. Guerra, on March 25, 2009, 

Dr. Cantu met Melody Cantu. On April 18, 2014, the Cantus got married. Melody Cantu has three 

children, one of whom is special needs, and all of whom now live in fear of Dr. Guerra surveilling 

them and coming for their mother.

19. Upon learning of Dr. Cantu’s meeting and marriage to Plaintiff Melody Cantu, 

Defendant Dr. Guerra began a campaign of harassment against Plaintiffs, intentionally alienating 

Dr. Cantu’s parents and two children from him to the point where his daughters won’t speak to 

him because of their instilled hatred of Melody Cantu.

20. On June 17, 2016, in the hopes of being able to speak with his daughters, Dr. Cantu 

divorced Melody Cantu. They secretly kept their relationship going for the next two years.

21. Throughout the next two years, Melody Cantu lived in fear of being accidentally 

seen with Dr. Cantu and triggering Dr. Guerra.

22. Then, on Easter Sunday of 2018, the secret relationship came to light.

23. On April 1, 2018, Melody Cantu drove by a local restaurant and, to her surprise, 

saw Dr. Cantu with his daughters and Dr. Guerra. Dr. Guerra had joined them at the restaurant, 

after claiming to run into them accidentally. As everyone was leaving the restaurant, Melody Cantu 

phoned Dr. Cantu, who invited her to speak with them. Melody Cantu pulled into the restaurant

parking lot and told Dr. Guerra, and her daughters, that she and Dr. Cantu were still seeing each 

other. Dr. Guerra and her daughters left as Melody Cantu was relating this secret to them. Melody 

and David Cantu then left separately.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 5 of 22
6

24. Thinking her relationship with Dr. Cantu was over, Melody Cantu moved on with 

her life.

25. On May 14, 2018, Dr. Cantu contacted Melody Cantu asking her to get back 

together again.

26. On May 15, 2018, Dr. Cantu told his parents that he was back together with Melody 

Cantu. Upon information and belief, his parents told Dr. Guerra.

27. On or about May 16, 2018, Dr. Guerra hired Defendant Digital Forensics 

Corporation, LLC to hack, surveil, and damage Plaintiffs’ computers and computer networks.

28. On May 29, 2018, Dr. Cantu’s lawyer served an enforcement of visitation on Dr. 

Guerra in the civil custody proceedings involving their children.

29. On May 29, 2018, Dr. Guerra filed a false Child Protective Services report against 

the Cantus.

30. On June 6, 2018, the CPS investigation finished with the investigator writing in 

their report “[t]his case is clearly not a CPS issue and more of a custody issue.”

31. In June of 2018, the Cantus began experiencing problems with their internet 

connection at home, despite having purchased ample bandwidth from their cable and internet 

provider. They began repeatedly experiencing bandwidth issues with their iPads, Smart TVs, and 

other devices the family of two adults and three children use daily. Their NEST home security 

camera network crashed, and they experienced similar problems with their computer networked 

thermostat and other networked household devices.

32. Over the coming months, their cable and internet provider, Spectrum/Charter, came

by five times to investigate the problems the Cantus were having with their internet but was unable 

to determine their source.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 6 of 22
7

33. On August 21, 2018, Melody Cantu received a text on her smartphone with a hidden 

tracking link: “Melody, could you price this for me? Thx https://goo.gl/sCbwZZ.” Melody Cantu 

clicked on the link, thinking it was a normal business appraisal request.

34. This exact link “https://goo.gl/sCbwZZ”, appears in Digital Forensics’ Phase I 

report, along with instructions to Dr. Guerra on how to deploy it against the Cantus.

35. The request and the link were fraudulent, and induced Plaintiff Melody Cantu to 

click on the said link without her authorization and consent. When Melody Cantu clicked on the 

link, a website opened and logged her IP address. Melody Cantu’s IP address was logged by way 

of a tracking URL.4 Upon information and belief, Defendant Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC 

created the link in the hopes that Melody Cantu would click on it so they could spy on her for 

Defendant Dr. Sandra Guerra. Links like this can also be used to install malware, keylogging 

software, bots, and other malicious codes. 

36. On August 22, 2018, Digital Forensics Corporation completed Phase I of its 

investigation. The Phase I report states: “[I]f the client is interested in proceeding to Phase II, the 

client needs to file a police report.” A sample police report was included with the Phase I report.

37. The Phase I report also says that DFC created “tracking URLs” (“phishing links”) 

and that Dr. Guerra needed: “to include the link in a message containing something the suspect 

might be interested enough to click on: DO NOT MENTION THE REAL PURPOSE BEHIND 

 

4 “As part of endeavors to know where traffic to a website is coming from, tracking URLs 

have become an effective way of revealing all the information needed. A tracking URL is a unique 

link that is created for the specific purpose of tracing where your visitors are coming from. A 

tracking URL will show you important metrics like the search engine from where a user clicked 

on your link; the keywords that were searched for, leading the user to visit your website; which of 

your call-to-actions initiated a response from a certain user; and so on.” What Is A Tracking URL 

and Why Is It Important?, LeadSquared, available at https://www.leadsquared.com/what-is-atracking-url/ (last accessed 07/15/20).

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 7 of 22
8

THE LINK. The message could be something like ‘I’d like to send you money,’ or ‘You will not 

believe this,’ along with that URL created for that suspect. Be creative, but do not reveal what the 

link really is.”

38. On August 29, 2018, the attorney for Dr. Cantu’s civil custody case against Dr. 

Guerra served discovery papers on her attorney, informing them of a forthcoming notice of 

deposition for Dr. Guerra’s testimony.

39. On August 30, 2018, Plaintiffs moved in together and Dr. Cantu closed the deed on 

the property.

40. On September 4, 2018, (the Tuesday after Labor Day Weekend) Dr. Guerra filed a 

police report against Melody Cantu, falsely accusing her of harassment. The police bodycam footage 

of her, requesting a police report, shows Dr. Guerra telling the police officer that Defendant Digital 

Forensics required her to file the report if she wanted to proceed with Phase II of the investigation.

41. On September 21, 2018, Spectrum/Charter sent a representative to investigate the 

persistent internet problems at the Cantus’ home. The representative examined the Cantus’ cable 

line leading into their house and discovered a cable signal splitter installed on their line that neither 

the cable company nor the Cantus put there. 

42. A cable splitter is a type of wiretap that sends the data flowing through a cable to 

more than one recipient.5 It does so by providing two or more hardware points to connect to the 

 

5 "[I]t is absolutely possible to split a cable signal and still have enough signal strength to operate 

a cable modem and feed HDTV signals to a QAM tuner (assuming the signal strength coming 

into the house is sufficient). And the Cable Act of 1992 means that it is legal to do so. But every 

time you split a cable or antenna signal, you lose at least 3 to 4 dB of signal strength. So if you’re 

splitting the signal 5 times, you could have as much as 15 to 20 db of loss in the signal by the 

time it reaches your modem or tuner." Chris Boylan, Will a Cable Splitter Hurt My Modem or 

HDTV Signal Strength?, BIG PICTURE BIG SOUND (Jan. 23, 2007), 

https://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/split-cable-feed-hdtv-modem-999.shtml.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 8 of 22
9

physical cable. A cable splitter must be spliced in, or put on the end of, a cable. It can be used to 

monitor the internet traffic coming in and out of a home.

43. In October of 2018, Melody Cantu’s employer, USAA, replaced all of her work 

equipment following her request for an investigation by USAA, of her secure work internet network 

connection separate from the Cantus’ home internet connection. USAA entrusts Melody Cantu with 

members’ private information and possessions. Thus, she is subject to regular background and 

security checks. Melody Cantu was worried that her work internet connection was hacked as well. 

After reporting her concern to USAA, they investigated. USAA’s investigation found that Mrs. 

Cantu’s work internet connection was secure, but not before one of the investigators commented that 

he thought someone had hacked the Cantus’ home internet connection.

44. On November 15, 2018, a Spectrum/Charter representative discovered the cable 

splitter was removed. There was no record of the splitter being removed by Spectrum/Charter. 

When Melody Cantu logged in to her router, she discovered that the firewall settings had been set 

to allow access to anyone and could not be reset by herself or by Spectrum/Charter when she called 

their internet support line.

45. On December 20, 2018, Melody Cantu received a postcard in the mail saying there 

was a warrant for her arrest and that she needed to turn herself in. There was no information as to 

the charges on the postcard.

46. On December 21, 2018, the day of a planned family holiday vacation, Mrs. Cantu 

voluntarily turned herself in at Bexar County Sheriff’s Satellite Office where she was booked and 

processed. She spent most of the day in shackles and did not know what she was being arrested for 

until the presiding judge told her it was for harassment. Shaken and confused, Melody Cantu pleaded 

not guilty. She then made it to the airport in time to join her family on their long-planned vacation.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 9 of 22
10

47. On January 3, 2019, the Cantus hired two computer forensics companies, Exhibit 

A Computer Forensics Investigations (“EACFI”) and Kip & Associates. The Cantus paid EACFI 

a $5,000 non-refundable retainer. 

48. EACFI’s investigation concluded that Digital Forensics Corporation was targeting 

Melody Cantu on behalf of Defendant Dr. Guerra.

49. Kip & Associates reiterated EACFI’s report, stating that the Cantus were victims

of targeted electronic and digital attacks, beginning in 2018, including phishing emails, text 

messages, sham retail websites, credit card fraud attempts, and identity theft attempts.

50. As a result of this cyberthreat environment, the Cantus invested more money in

investigative, corrective, and protective measures. This included computer and network forensic 

analysis, device forensic analysis, network monitoring, consultation services, a dark web scan, 

data and device storage for data and devices.

51. The Cantus replaced their router, at the cost of $660, since they feared DFC 

installed malware on their old router. Starting February 1, 2020, the Cantus paid CDR Business IT 

Solutions, LLC $108.24 a month for network monitoring of their new router. The computer 

forensic investigation also required the Cantus to turn over many of their electronic devices for 

analysis. This necessitated the purchase of replacements. And Melody Cantu took time off from 

work to handle the six service calls to Spectrum/Charter to try and resolve the network service 

interruptions.

52. All these costs aggregate to over $5,000 in loss sustained by the Cantus in 2019.

53. On June 24, 2019, all charges against Melody Cantu were dismissed on speedy 

trial grounds. 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 10 of 22
11

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A 

PROTECTED COMPUTER 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(2)(c)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

54. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

55. Plaintiffs’ computers are used in interstate commerce and comprise a “protected 

computer” as that term is used in 18 U.S.C.§ 1030(e)(2)(B).

56. Plaintiffs maintained and secured their computers by reasonable means, and never 

authorized Defendants to access them.

57. Defendants Dr. Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC intentionally 

accessed the Cantus’ protected computers without authorization and thereby obtained information.

This unauthorized access includes phishing Plaintiffs with fraudulent tracking URLs, wiretapping 

the Cantus’ cable internet connection to their home and monitoring network traffic, and the use of 

surveillance malware against the Plaintiffs.

58. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered loss in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – UNAUTHORIZED DAMAGE TO A 

PROTECTED COMPUTER 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(A)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

59. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 11 of 22
12

60. Plaintiffs’ computers are used in interstate commerce and comprise a “protected 

computer” as that term is used in 18 U.S.C.§ 1030(e)(2)(B).

61. Defendants Dr. Guerra and DFC knowingly caused the transmission of a program, 

information, code, or command, and intentionally caused damage without authorization. This 

damage includes impairment to the integrity and availability of the Cantus’ data, programs, systems, 

and information on the Cantus’ computers and networks resulting from computer crashes, 

diminished bandwidth, diminished processing time, and the deletion and alteration of data, all caused 

by Defendants’ phishing, wiretapping, malware, and use of malicious codes against Plaintiffs.

62. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered losses in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A 

PROTECTED COMPUTER RECKLESSLY CAUSING DAMAGE

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(B)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

63. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

64. Plaintiffs’ computers are used in interstate commerce and comprise a “protected 

computer” as that term is used in 18 U.S.C.§ 1030(e)(2)(B).

65. Defendants Dr. Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC intentionally 

accessed the Cantus’ protected computers without authorization and thereby recklessly impaired

the integrity and availability of the Cantus’ data, programs, systems, and information. This 

unauthorized access includes phishing Plaintiffs with fraudulent tracking URLs, wiretapping the 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 12 of 22
13

Cantus’ cable internet connection to their home and monitoring network traffic, and the use of 

surveillance malware and malicious codes against the Plaintiffs.

66. Defendants’ unauthorized access recklessly impaired the integrity and availability 

of the data, programs, systems, and information on the Cantus’ computers and networks by, among 

other things, causing computer crashes, diminished bandwidth, diminished processing time, and 

the deletion and alteration of data. This reckless damage resulted from Defendants’ phishing, 

wiretapping, malware, surveillance, and use of malicious codes against the Plaintiffs.

67. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered losses in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A 

PROTECTED COMPUTER CAUSING DAMAGE AND LOSS

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(C)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

68. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

69. Plaintiffs’ computers are used in interstate commerce and comprise a “protected 

computer” as that term is used in 18 U.S.C.§ 1030(e)(2)(B).

70. Defendants Dr. Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC intentionally 

accessed the Cantus’ protected computers without authorization and thereby impaired the integrity 

and availability of the Cantus’ data, programs, systems, and information. This unauthorized access 

includes phishing Plaintiffs with fraudulent tracking URLs, wiretapping the Cantu’s home cable 

internet connection, and monitoring network traffic, and the use of surveillance malware and 

malicious codes against the Plaintiffs.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 13 of 22
14

71. Defendants’ unauthorized access impaired the integrity and availability of the 

Cantus’ data, programs, systems, and information on the Cantus’ computers and networks by 

causing computer crashes, diminished bandwidth, diminished processing time, and the deletion 

and alteration of data. Defendants caused this damage and loss through their use of phishing, 

wiretapping, malware, surveillance, and the use of malicious codes against the Plaintiffs.

72. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered losses in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state. 

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT 

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(2)(c) & 1030(b)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

73. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

74. Plaintiffs’ computers are used in interstate commerce and comprise a “protected 

computer” as that term is used in 18 U.S.C.§ 1030(e)(2)(B).

75. Plaintiffs maintained and secured their computers by reasonable means.

76. Defendant Dr. Guerra paid, and Digital Forensics Corporation LLC agreed, to hack 

and surveil the Cantus’ computers and networks without their knowledge and authorization in 

violation of 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(2)(C).

77. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered loss in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 14 of 22
15

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT 

UNAUTHORIZED DAMAGE TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(A) & 1030(b)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

78. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

79. Under 18 U.S.C.§ 1030(e)(2)(B) Plaintiffs’ computers, routers, switches, and 

network hardware and software are used in interstate commerce “protected computers.” 

80. Plaintiffs maintained and secured their computers by reasonable means.

81. Defendant Dr. Guerra paid, and Digital Forensics Corporation LLC agreed, to hack, 

surveil, and damage the Cantus’ computers and networks without their knowledge and 

authorization in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(A).

82. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered loss in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT RECKLESS

DAMAGE TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER 

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(B) & 1030(b)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

83. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

84. Under 18 U.S.C.§ 1030(e)(2)(B) Plaintiffs’ computers, routers, switches, and 

network hardware and software are used in interstate commerce “protected computers.” 

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 15 of 22
16

85. Plaintiffs maintained and secured their computers by reasonable means.

86. Defendant Dr. Guerra paid, and Digital Forensics Corporation LLC agreed, to hack, 

surveil, and recklessly damage the Cantus’ computers and networks without their knowledge and 

authorization in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(A).

87. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered loss in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

COMPUTER FRAUD AND ABUSE ACT – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT 

UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO A PROTECTED COMPUTER CAUSING DAMAGE 

AND LOSS

18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(C) & 1030(b)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

88. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

89. Under 18 U.S.C.§ 1030(e)(2)(B) Plaintiffs’ computers, routers, switches, and 

network hardware and software are used in interstate commerce “protected computers.”

90. Plaintiffs maintained and secured their computers by reasonable means.

91. Defendant Dr. Guerra paid, and Digital Forensics Corporation LLC agreed, to hack, 

surveil, and damage the Cantus’ computers and networks without their knowledge and 

authorization, causing loss, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(A).

92. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered loss in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 16 of 22
17

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION 

KNOWINGLY ACCESSING WITHOUT EFFECTIVE CONSENT A COMPUTER, 

COMPUTER NETWORK, OR COMPUTER SYSTEM

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001 & Texas Penal Code § 33.02(a)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

93. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

94. Dr. Guerra and DFC violated § 33.02(a) of the Texas Penal Code by 

knowingly accessing the Cantus’ computer, computer network, or computer system without 

the Plaintiffs’ consent.

95. Defendants Dr. Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC knowingly 

accessed the Cantus’ protected computers, computer networks, and computer systems without 

effective consent. This knowing access without effective consent includes Defendants phishing 

Plaintiffs with fraudulent tracking URLs, wiretapping Plaintiffs’ home cable internet 

connection, monitoring their network traffic, and the use of surveillance malware and 

malicious codes against the Plaintiffs.

96. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered loss in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess 

the damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

97. Under § 143.001 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Defendants’

are civilly liable for their knowing and intentional violation of §§ 33.02(a) of the Texas 

Penal Code.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 17 of 22
18

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION 

KNOWINGLY ACCESSING A COMPUTER, COMPUTER NETWORK, OR 

COMPUTER SYSTEM WITH THE INTENT TO DEFRAUD, OR HARM ANOTHER 

OR ALTER, DAMAGE, OR DELETE PROPERTY WITHOUT EFFECTIVE CONSENT

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001 & Texas Penal Code § 33.02(b-1) (1)

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

98. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

99. Defendants Dr. Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation violated § 33.02(b-1) 

(1) of the Texas Penal Code by knowingly accessing the Cantus’ computers, computer networks, 

or computer systems with the intent to defraud or harm the Cantus, or to alter, damage, or delete 

their property.

100. Defendants Dr. Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC knowingly 

accessed the Cantus’ protected computers, computer networks, and computer systems without 

effective consent. This knowing access without effective consent includes Defendants phishing 

Plaintiffs with fraudulent tracking URLs, wiretapping Plaintiffs’ home cable internet connection,

monitoring their network traffic, and the use of surveillance malware and malicious codes against 

the Plaintiffs. 

101. Defendants knowingly accessed the Cantus’ computers, computer network, and 

computer systems without effective consent with the intent to alter, damage, or delete the Cantus’

property. Defendants’ access without effective consent impaired the integrity and availability of 

the Cantu’s data, programs, systems, and information on the Cantu’s computers and networks by 

causing computer crashes, diminished bandwidth, diminished processing time, and the deletion 

and alteration of data. Defendants caused this damage and loss through their use of phishing, 

wiretapping, malware, surveillance, and the use of malicious codes against Plaintiffs.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 18 of 22
19

102. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered loss in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

103. Under § 143.001 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Defendants are 

civilly liable for their knowing and intentional violation of Texas Penal Code § 33.02(b-1) (1).

ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION 

ELECTRONIC ACCESS INTERFERENCE

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 143.001 & Texas Penal Code § 33.022

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

104. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

105. Defendants intentionally interrupted or suspended access to Plaintiffs’ computer 

systems or computer networks without Plaintiffs effective consent in violation of Texas Penal 

Code § 33.022.

106. Defendants’ electronic access interference interrupted and suspended the 

availability of the Cantu’s data, programs, systems, and information on their computers and 

networks by causing computer crashes, diminished bandwidth, diminished processing time, and 

the deletion and alteration of data. Defendants caused this damage and loss through their use of 

phishing, wiretapping, malware, surveillance, and the use of malicious codes against Plaintiffs.

107. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, the Cantus suffered loss in expending time, 

money, and resources aggregating at least $5,000 in value, to investigate the intrusion, assess the 

damage, and restore their systems to their prior state.

108. Under § 143.001 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Defendants are 

civilly liable for their knowing and intentional violation of Texas Penal Code § 33.022.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 19 of 22
20

TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

INTENTIONAL INTERCEPTION, OR ENDEAVOURING TO USE ANY ELECTRONIC 

WIRE, ORAL OR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS

18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et. seq.

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

109. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

110. The Federal Wiretap Act, under18 U.S.C. § 2511, as amended by the Electronic 

Communications Privacy Act of 1986, prohibits the intentional interception of the contents of any 

wire, oral, or electronic communication through the use of a device.

111. Dr. Guerra and DFC violated 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et seq. by intentionally using, and 

endeavoring to use, any electronic, mechanical, or other device, including the installation of a cable 

line splitter and tracking URLs, to intercept Plaintiffs’ wire, oral, or electronic communications.

THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

MALICIOUS PROSECUTION

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

112. Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs by reference, as though fully set 

forth herein.

113. Defendant Dr. Guerra filed a false police report against Plaintiff Melody Cantu at 

the urging of Defendant Digital Forensics Corporation. DFC expressly told Dr. Guerra that in order 

to obtain a “Phase II” report on Plaintiffs, a police report was required. On the video recording of 

Dr. Guerra’s police report, she can be heard saying that Digital Forensics requires her to file a 

report in order to proceed further.

114. This false police report, without probable cause, led to Melody Cantu’s arrest and 

prosecution for harassment.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 20 of 22
21

115. The prosecution against Plaintiff Melody Cantu was resolved in her favor, as the 

case was dismissed due to the violation of her constitutional right to a speedy trial.

116. Plaintiff Melody Cantu was innocent.

117. The proceeding lacked probable cause, as there was no evidence to substantiate 

Defendant’s claim of harassment by Plaintiff Melody Cantu and the prosecutor ignored evidence 

of Dr. Guerra’s prior fraudulent Child Protective Services complaint against the Cantus, which 

CPS found baseless.

118. The Defendants acted with malice, Dr. Guerra with jealousy-fueled hatred and 

Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC for money.

119. As a result of the malicious prosecution, Plaintiff Melody Cantu suffered loss in 

paying attorney’s fees for representation in the criminal matter.

120. As a result of the malicious prosecution, Plaintiffs also suffered damage to their 

reputations and occupations. Despite the dismissal, the arrest turns up on the security background 

screenings that Melody Cantu’s work with USAA requires.

121. As a result of the malicious prosecution, Plaintiff Melody Cantu suffered emotional 

harm stemming from her arrest.

FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Against Defendants Dr. Sandra Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC

122. Defendants Dr. Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation acted intentionally or 

recklessly by engaging in a malicious prosecution of Cantu and the cyberstalking of the Cantus.

123. The Defendants’ relentless cyberstalking and malicious prosecution of Plaintiffs 

was extreme and outrageous.

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 21 of 22
22

124. The actions of Defendants caused Plaintiffs emotional distress by putting the 

Cantus in a state of prolonged and sustained fear for their safety and privacy of their family, and 

themselves, because of the repeated false charges, false investigations, and cyberstalking.

Prayer for Relief

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter judgment in their favor 

and award the following relief against Defendants:

a. An award against Defendants Dr. Guerra and Digital Forensics Corporation, LLC for 

compensatory damages plus interest and costs;

b. An award against Defendants for consequential damages,

c. That the Court award punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial;

d. That the Court award Plaintiffs their attorney’s fees and expenses; 

e. That the Court enter a permanent injunction against Defendants enjoining them from 

engaging further in the actions complained of; and

f. That the Court award Plaintiffs such other and further relief as is just and proper under

the circumstances.

Dated: July 15, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Tor Ekeland

Tor Ekeland (NY Bar No. 4493631)

Pro Hac Vice

Tor Ekeland Law, PLLC

195 Montague Street, 14th Floor

Brooklyn, NY 11201

t: (718) 737 - 7264

f: (718) 504 - 5417

tor@torekeland.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Dr. Rodrigo Cantu 

and Melody Joy Cantu

Case 5:20-cv-00746-JKP Document 6 Filed 07/17/20 Page 22 of 22