IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

DEAN OBEIDALLAH,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANDREW B. ANGLIN,

DBA Daily Stormer, 

and

MOONBASE HOLDINGS, LLC,

DBA Andrew Anglin, 

and

JOHN DOES NUMBERS 1–10,

Individuals who also assisted in the 

publication or representation of false 

statements regarding

Mr. Obeidallah, 

Defendants. 

CASE NO. 2:17-CV-00720-EAS-EPD

Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus

Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT

AGAINST DEFENDANT MOONBASE HOLDINGS, LLC

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 1 of 24 PAGEID #: 408
Page 1 of 1

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

AGAINST DEFENDANT MOONBASE HOLDINGS, LLC

Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah respectfully moves the Court for limited discovery in aid of default 

judgment against Defendant Moonbase Holdings, LLC in the above-captioned action. Attached 

hereto is a memorandum in support which establishes good cause for Mr. Obeidallah’s request for 

leave to take the requested, limited discovery. Attached as Exhibit 30 is a proposed order for the 

Court’s consideration.

Respectfully submitted,

DATED: 03/26/2018

Subodh Chandra (OH Bar No. 0069233)

Donald Screen (OH Bar No. 0044070)

THE CHANDRA LAW FIRM LLC

1265 W. 6th St., Suite 400

Cleveland, OH 44113-1326

Phone: 216.578.1700 Fx: 216.578.1800

Subodh.Chandra@ChandraLaw.com

Donald.Screen@ChandraLaw.com

Johnathan Smith (D.C. Bar No. 1029373)

Juvaria Khan (N.Y. Bar No. 5027461)

MUSLIM ADVOCATES

P.O. Box 66408

Washington, D.C. 20035

Phone: 202.897.1894

johnathan@muslimadvocates.org

juvaria@muslimadvocates.org

Admitted pro hac vice

/s/ Abid R. Qureshi

Abid R. Qureshi (D.C. Bar No. 459227)

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

555 Eleventh St., NW, Suite 1000

Washington, D.C. 20004-1304

Phone: 202.637.2200 Fx: 202.637.2201

abid.qureshi@lw.com 

Admitted pro hac vice

Attorneys for Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 2 of 24 PAGEID #: 409
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND................................................................................................................2

A. Defendant Moonbase was apparently established to camouflage the Internet 

website on which the Defamatory Article was published.................................................2

B. Defendant Moonbase also assisted in the Daily Stormer’s financing and 

operations. ...............................................................................................................................4

C. After publication of the Defamatory Article, Defendant Moonbase 

participated in its republication several times.....................................................................7

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW...................................................................................................................9

III. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

AGAINST DEFENDANT MOONBASE .......................................................................................10

A. Discovery will aid Mr. Obeidallah in arguing exigent circumstances warrant 

the immediate entry of default judgment against Defendant Moonbase. ....................10

B. Discovery will aid Mr. Obeidallah in detailing apportionment of liability 

among defendants.................................................................................................................15

C. Discovery will aid Mr. Obeidallah in establishing Defendant Moonbase’s 

malice and the quantum of damages attributable to Defendant Moonbase. ...............16

IV. REQUEST FOR RELIEF....................................................................................................................18

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 3 of 24 PAGEID #: 410
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page(s)

CASES

Adobe Sys. Inc. v. Bunhey,

No. 5:13-cv-01365-VAP-OP, 2013 WL 12140304 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 29, 2013) .................................10

Antoine v. Boutte,

No. 3:15-cv-00561-JWD-EWD, 2016 WL 6138252 (M.D. La. Oct. 20, 2016)...............................10

Arista Records, LLC v. Does 1-15,

No. 1:07-cv-450, 2007 WL 5254326 (W.D. Mich. Nov. 5, 2007)........................................................9

Austin v. Remington,

46 Conn. 116 (1878) .................................................................................................................................17

Frow v. De La Vega,

82 U.S. 552 (1872).....................................................................................................................................11

Funk v. Lincoln-Lancaster Cty. Crime Stoppers, Inc.,

885 N.W.2d 1 (Neb. 2016).......................................................................................................................17

Gersh v. Anglin,

9:17-cv-00050-DLC-JCL (D. Mont.) ...................................................................................................4, 8

Int’l Gemmological Inst., Inc. v. Rafaeil,

No. 1:05-cv-02395-JGK-JCF, 2005 WL 3880222 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 17, 2005) ..................................11

Kimberly v. Coastline Coal Corp.,

No. 87-6199, 1988 WL 93305 (6th Cir. Sept. 9, 1988)........................................................................11

Lucas v. Jolin,

No. 1:15-cv-00108-TSB-SKB, 2015 WL 7292836 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 29, 2015), 

report and recommendation adopted, No. 1:15-cv-00108-TSB-SKB, 2015 WL 7276808 

(S.D. Ohio Nov. 18, 2015).......................................................................................................................11

Lucas v. Telemarketer Calling from (407) 476-5680,

No. 1:12-cv-00630-TSB-SKB, 2014 WL 5308573 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 16, 2014) ................................11

Munhwa Broad. Corp. v. Create New Tech. Co.,

No. 2:14-cv-04213-RGK-PJW, 2015 WL 12749448 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 2, 2015) ...............................16

Sheridan v. Oak Street Mortg., LLC,

244 F.R.D. 520 (E.D. Wis. 2007)............................................................................................................10

Sines v. Kessler,

No. 3:17-cv-00072-NKM-JCH (W.D. Va. Mar. 14, 2018)..................................................................13

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 4 of 24 PAGEID #: 411
Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corp. v. Dhindsa,

No. 1:10-cv-00335-LJO-SKO, 2010 WL 2353520 (E.D. Cal. June 9, 2010) ...................................10

Twitch Interactive, Inc. v. Johnston,

No. 5:16-cv-03404-BLF, 2017 WL 1133520 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2017)...........................................10

RULES

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d) ............................................................................................................................... 1, 9, 18

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)...........................................................................................................................................9

OTHER AUTHORITIES

Casey Michel, White Supremacists’ Favorite Fundraising Site May Be Imploding: Down For 

Over A Month, Hatreon May Be Done For Good, ThinkProgress, 

https://thinkprogress.org/white-supremacist-fundraiser-dead-bdee08eeb5a6 

(Mar. 13, 2018).............................................................................................................................................6

Merriam-Webster, Cryptocurrency, https://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/cryptocurrency (Mar. 18, 2018)...................................................................12

Monero, https://getmonero.org (last visited Mar. 25, 2018)....................................................................13

Zappitelli CPAs Inc., Services, http://zappitellicpasinc.com/services (last visited Mar. 

19, 2018).....................................................................................................................................................15

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 5 of 24 PAGEID #: 412
Page 1 of 18

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY IN AID OF 

DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT MOONBASE HOLDINGS, LLC

Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah respectfully moves this Court pursuant to Rule 26(d)(1) of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for leave to take limited discovery in aid of Mr. Obeidallah’s 

forthcoming motion for default judgment against Defendant Moonbase Holdings, LLC 

(“Moonbase”). The proposed requests for production and matters for examination are attached as 

Exhibit 1. 

Defendant Moonbase is integral to the Daily Stormer’s operations, having processed monetary

contributions used to fund its publications and registered the web domain at which the Defamatory 

Article was initially published.1 Defendant Moonbase, by and through one of its representatives and 

agent for service (Defendant Andrew B. Anglin), has regularly acknowledged and mocked the 

pendency of this federal action. Nonetheless, Defendant Moonbase failed to file a responsive pleading 

after being properly served and the Clerk has now entered default against it. Mr. Obeidallah must 

now apply to this Court for default judgment but, as a result of Defendant Moonbase’s refusal to 

respond, Mr. Obeidallah is denied the opportunity to develop the factual record regarding the 

defendants’ liability and damages. Good cause thus exists for the requested discovery, which will 

enable Mr. Obeidallah to make necessary showings regarding: (1) the need for immediate entry of 

default judgment against Defendant Moonbase; (2) how liability should be apportioned among 

Defendant Moonbase and the other defendants; and (3) the extent of Mr. Obeidallah’s damages

attributable to Defendant Moonbase.

 

1 The Defamatory Article refers to an article published by the Daily Stormer on or around June 1, 2017, 

by the defendants. The article falsely claims that Mr. Obeidallah, inter alia, planned and executed the 

horrific terrorist attack that took place at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, United Kingdom 

on May 22, 2017. See Compl. ¶ 1, ECF No. 1.

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 6 of 24 PAGEID #: 413
Page 2 of 18

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

While Defendants in this proceeding have actively evaded service and refused to participate in 

the development of the factual record, Mr. Obeidallah has undertaken considerable efforts to uncover 

publically available facts. 

A. Defendant Moonbase was apparently established to camouflage the Internet 

website on which the Defamatory Article was published.

Defendant Moonbase is an Ohio for-profit, limited liability company (“LLC”) that was 

established by Defendant Anglin on September 2, 2016. Ex. 2, Moonbase’s Articles of Incorp., at 4

(reflecting that “Andrew B. Anglin” signed Defendant Moonbase’s Articles of Organization as “a 

member, manager or other representative”). Defendant Anglin was identified as Defendant 

Moonbase’s statutory agent for service, and “any process, notice or demand” was to be sent to 6827 

North High Street, Suite 121, Worthington, Ohio 43085—i.e., Greg Anglin’s Office. Id. at 3. As 

Mr. Obeidallah has previously explained, occupants of Greg Anglin’s Office reported having no 

knowledge of Defendant Anglin but stated that Greg Anglin regularly visits to collect the mail at that 

address. See Ex. 3, Decl. of Tina L. Schroeder, ⁋ 10(a); see also Pl.’s Mot. for Leave to Conduct Ltd. 

Disc. in Aid of Service 7–8, ECF No. 17 (discussing investigator’s encounter with occupants at Greg 

Anglin’s Office). The Ohio Secretary of State mailed Defendant Moonbase’s Articles of Organization 

to Karen Zappitelli at 5721 Norwich Street, Hilliard, Ohio 43026, Ex. 2, Moonbase’s Articles of 

Incorp., at 1, an address associated with Zappitelli CPAs Inc. (“Zappitelli CPAs”), Ex. 4, Zappitelli 

CPAs Contact Us Page, at 1 (stating that Zappitelli CPAs operates at 5275 Norwich Street, Hilliard, 

OH 43026); Ex. 5, 5275 Record, at 1 (stating that Norwich Street LLC, owner of 5275 Norwich Street, 

uses “Karen Zappitelle” [sic] for its tax bill mailing); Pl.’s Renewed Mot. for Leave to Conduct Ltd. 

Disc. in Aid of Service 11–13, ECF No. 23 (explaining location of Zappitelli CPAs and likelihood that 

same would have relevant documents and information), a certified public accounting practice 

operating in close proximity to Greg and Andrew Anglin’s residences and/or business addresses in 

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 7 of 24 PAGEID #: 414
Page 3 of 18

the Worthington, Ohio area, Ex. 6, Morning Star Summary (identifying address of Morning Star 

Ministries USA, Inc., owned and operated by Greg Anglin); Ex. 7, Christian Counselors Group 

Contact Information (identifying address associated with “Anglin Greg-Christian Counselors 

Group”).

Defendant Moonbase was apparently established, at least in part, in order to process credit 

card donations from the Daily Stormer’s readership. This fact is evident from a December 13, 2016 

article published by Defendant Anglin titled Support the Daily Stormer – With Your Credit Card!. Ex. 8, 

DS Dec. 13, 2016 Article. In that article, Defendant Anglin states:

Also finally, it won’t say “Daily Stormer” on your credit card bill, but will instead 

say “Moonbase Holdings,” which either sounds like a hobby shop or a multilevel 

marketing scheme run by reptoids [sic]. Anyway, it looks innocuous on your 

statement.

I thought that was a neat trick.

Id. at 13–14 (emphasis added). That same article directed readers to send cash, checks, and money 

orders to Greg Anglin’s Office which, as explained above, were likely received and deposited by Greg 

Anglin. Id. at 15.

On December 1, 2016, Defendant Anglin registered “Daily Stormer” as an Ohio trade name, 

the business of which was listed as an “[i]nternet news website.” Ex. 9, DS Trade Name Reg., at 2. 

Greg Anglin signed the Daily Stormer’s trade name registration as Defendant Anglin’s “authorized 

representative.” Id. at 3. The Daily Stormer’s “[b]usiness address” was designated as Greg Anglin’s 

Office, and the Certificate was mailed to Defendant Moonbase (ATTN: Andrew Anglin) at Greg 

Anglin’s Office. Id. at 1–2.

On January 5, 2017, Defendant Moonbase registered “Andrew Anglin” as an Ohio trade name. 

Ex. 10, A. Anglin Trade Name Reg. Greg Anglin also signed the “Andrew Anglin” trade name 

registration, this time representing himself as Defendant Moonbase’s “authorized representative,” and 

Greg Anglin further identified his office as Defendant Moonbase’s “[b]usiness address.” Id. at 2–3. 

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 8 of 24 PAGEID #: 415
Page 4 of 18

Although formally registered by Defendant Moonbase, the Ohio Secretary of State mailed the trade 

name registration’s Certificate to “Greg Mark Anglin” at Greg Anglin’s Office. Id. at 1. It appears 

the Ohio Secretary of State also sent Greg Anglin an email to his personal email address—

[REDACTED]2—confirming Defendant Moonbase’s registration of the “Andrew Anglin” trade 

name. Ex. 11, Email Confirmation.

B. Defendant Moonbase also assisted in the Daily Stormer’s financing and 

operations.

Defendant Moonbase, acting through Defendant Anglin and Greg Anglin, appears to have 

continued playing an integral role in the Daily Stormer’s financing and operations in the lead-up to the 

publication of the Defamatory Article. As of early-January 2017, Defendant Anglin continued to 

direct users to send donations to Greg Anglin’s Office. Ex. 12, DS Jan. 12, 2017 Article, at 5. This 

direction changed in mid-April 2017 following the initiation of a civil suit against Defendant Anglin 

by Ms. Tanya Gersh in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana. See Gersh v. Anglin, 9:17-

cv-00050-DLC-JCL (D. Mont.) (the “Gersh Action”). Shortly thereafter, and possibly in response to 

protests outside Greg Anglin’s Office, the Daily Stormer published an article titled SPLC Is Suing Anglin! 

Donate Now to STOP THESE KIKES, in which readers were directed to send payments to a Post Office 

Box (“PO Box”)—PO Box 208, Worthington, Ohio 43085 (“PO Box 208”)—rather than Greg 

Anglin’s Office. Ex. 13, DS Apr. 27, 2017 Article, at 1. 

The U.S. Postal Service (“USPS”) has provided the “Application for Post Office Box Service” 

used to establish PO Box 208 (the “Application”). Ex. 14, PO Box 208 Reg. The Application reflects 

that PO Box 208 was established for “Business/Organization Use,” the name of which is “Andrew 

Anglin”—i.e., the same trade name that Defendant Moonbase registered in January 2017 for exclusive

 

2 Plaintiff has redacted Greg Anglin’s email address in the interest of privacy. Plaintiff would 

respectfully refer the Court to the corresponding exhibit, which is publicly-available information.

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 9 of 24 PAGEID #: 416
Page 5 of 18

use in Ohio. Ex. 10, A. Anglin Trade Name Reg. Thus, Defendant Moonbase appears to be the true 

owner of PO Box 208.3 The Application, however, was completed by “Gregory Anglin,” who 

provided his business address, personal email address, and phone number as the contact information 

for Defendant Moonbase (d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”). Ex. 14, PO Box 208 Reg., at 1. The Application 

further provides that Defendant Moonbase (d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”) will “be receiving mail at 

this . . . PO Box number[],” but Greg Anglin also designated himself as a “[p]erson[] or 

representative[] of the business/organization who [is] authorized to pick up mail addressed to 

this . . . PO Box number[].” Id. at 2. Defendant Moonbase appears to have utilized PO Box 208 to 

receive donations from the Daily Stormer’s readership at least through late-October 2018 based on 

Defendant Anglin having announced, on September 24, 2017, that the “PO Box has been kiked, but 

right now I have a month’s worth of forwarding. So if you want to send something to that, do it 

now.” Ex. 15, DS’s Sep. 24, 2017 Article, at 5. 

Also in that September 24, 2017 article, Defendant Anglin announced that “[f]or the first time 

since 2014 we have the ability to receive credit card donations in the form of Hatreon.”4 Ex. 15, DS’s 

Sept. 24, 2017 Article, at 3. (Hatreon appears to be a “crowdfunding” platform, similar to popular 

sites like Kickstarter and Patreon, by which individuals can pledge donations in support of a project.) 

 

3 The efforts taken by defendants and Greg Anglin to obfuscate and conceal their Daily Stormer-related 

activities has created uncertainty as to ownership of PO Box 208. While preliminary analysis suggested 

that PO Box 208 was secured by Greg Anglin on Defendant Anglin’s behalf, further investigative 

efforts indicate that Defendant Moonbase is the registrant of PO Box 208. The requested discovery 

will aid Mr. Obeidallah in resolving certainty about this and similar issues surrounding a forthcoming 

motion for default judgment against Defendant Moonbase. 

4 Defendant Anglin’s suggestion that, since 2014, he is unable to receive credit card donations is likely 

either an error or an effort to mislead the Daily Stormer’s readership. As explained above, Defendant 

Anglin posted an article on December 13, 2016 acknowledging that he could, in fact, receive credit 

card donations through Defendant Moonbase. Ex. 8, DS Dec. 13, 2016 Article, at 6–7. Defendant 

Anglin also stated as recently as June 10, 2017, in an article announcing that he had hired Marc 

Randazza to represent him in the Gersh Action, that the Daily Stormer’s readership “can continue 

donating to our fund with a credit card.” Ex. 16, DS June 10, 2017 Article, at 4.

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 10 of 24 PAGEID #: 417
Page 6 of 18

As explained above, Defendant Moonbase traditionally served as the front through which Defendant 

Anglin and Greg Anglin appear to have funneled donations from the Daily Stormer’s readership, 

including credit card donations. The Hatreon site for “Andrew Anglin” was established as early as 

August 14, 2017—two days prior to this action being filed—for purpose of “creating the Daily 

Stormer.”5 Ex. 17, Hatreon Page Aug. 14, 2017. “Andrew Anglin” received approximately $1,005.17 

per month in August 2017 through Hatreon, id., and that number had increased to approximately 

$3,405.70 per month as of early-February 2018, Ex. 18, Hatreon Page Mar. 16, 2018. However, the 

Hatreon site has reported since February 9, 2018 that “[p]ledging is current disabled while we upgrade 

our systems,” id., and it has been reported elsewhere that this truly means Hatreon is no longer able 

to process payments, see Casey Michel, White Supremacists’ Favorite Fundraising Site May Be Imploding: Down 

For Over A Month, Hatreon May Be Done For Good, ThinkProgress, https://thinkprogress.org/whitesupremacist-fundraiser-dead-bdee08eeb5a6 (Mar. 13, 2018). Contemporaneous with this 

announcement, Defendant Anglin posted a series of messages, Ex. 19, Three Gab Messages From 

Early 2018 (Gab messages dated approximately “two months” before March 18, 2018, when they were 

copied), on the Gab account6 associated with his name, announcing that his “money is basically dried 

up” as a result of the legal fees he has incurred (likely in relation to the Gersh Action, the only case 

where he has entered an appearance):

 

5 As with PO Box 208, see supra note 3, it is unclear whether Hatreon’s reference to “Andrew Anglin” 

refers to Defendant Anglin or Defendant Moonbase (d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”). In light of Defendant 

Moonbase’s traditional role in processing credit card donations from the Daily Stormer’s readership, it 

may well be that Defendant Moonbase (acting as an alter ego for Greg Anglin and/or Defendant 

Anglin) is responsible for receipt of the Hatreon donations. 

6 Gab is an alternative social-networking platform similar to the popular site known as Twitter.

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 11 of 24 PAGEID #: 418
Page 7 of 18

C. After publication of the Defamatory Article, Defendant Moonbase participated 

in its republication several times.

In addition to funneling contributions on behalf of Defendant Anglin and Greg Anglin, 

Defendant Moonbase appears to have participated in the publication (and republication) of the 

Defamatory Article giving rise to this litigation. The Defamatory Article was first published on June 

1, 2017 at the Daily Stormer’s original, but now defunct, web domain—www.dailystormer.com. Ex. 20, 

DS June 1, 2017 Article. The Daily Stormer’s “.com” domain was established on March 20, 2013 with 

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 12 of 24 PAGEID #: 419
Page 8 of 18

registrar GoDaddy. Ex. 21, DS’s Original .COM Registration. Greg Anglin was identified as the Daily 

Stormer’s original registrant, administrator, and technical contact, and the Daily Stormer’s address was 

listed as Greg Anglin’s Office. Id. at 1–2. Sometime following Defendant Moonbase’s establishment 

and its registration of the trade name “Andrew Anglin,” the registration was changed to reflect a 

registrant, administrative, and technical contact of “Andrew Anglin” on behalf of “Moonbase 

Holdings.” Ex. 22, DS’s Amended .COM Registration, at 1–2. The address associated with the 

“.com” domain’s amended registration was PO Box 208—i.e., the post office box owned by 

Defendant Moonbase (d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”) at which Greg Anglin received donations from the 

Daily Stormer’s readership. Id. Defendant Moonbase remained the Daily Stormer’s “.com” registrant 

when this case was filed in mid-August 2017. Id. (reflecting last updated date of Aug. 15, 2017).

Defendant Moonbase has continued to participate in defaming Mr. Obeidallah since the Daily 

Stormer’s “.com” domain was terminated in mid-August 2017. Since that time, the Daily Stormer has 

reappeared at approximately sixteen (16) different web domains,7 and the Defamatory Article appears 

republished at each domain. Defendants are thus responsible for having republished the 

Defamatory Article at least sixteen (16) times,

8 and Defendant Moonbase is again listed as the 

registrant organization for numerous of those domains. See, e.g., Ex. 24, DS’s .AI WhoIs; Ex. 25, DS’s 

.TOP WhoIs; see also Ex. 26, DS’s .WS WhoIs (registering “.ws” domain using “Andrew Anglin” and 

PO Box 208, but not expressly referencing Defendant Moonbase). As with the “.com” domain 

 

7 In addition to the “.com” domain, Defendant Anglin reports on his Gab account that the Daily 

Stormer website has been republished at each of: (1) dailystormer.wang; (2) dailystormer.ru; 

(3) dailystormer.lol; (4) punishedstormer.com; (5) dailystormer.al; (6) dailystormer.at; 

(7) dailystormer.is; (8) dailystormer.cat; (9) dailystormer.ph; (10) dailystormer.ai; (11) dailystormer.ws; 

(12) dailystormer.hk; (13) dailystormer.red; (14) dailystormer.top; (15) dailystormer.name; and (16) on 

the so-called “dark web” at dstormer6em3i4km.onion.link/. Ex. 23 (sixteen images copied from 

Defendant Anglin’s Gab account, reflecting the republication of the Daily Stormer at these domains).

8 See J. Wolman Decl. ¶ 4, Gersh v. Anglin, 9:17-cv-00050-DLC-JCL (D. Mont.), ECF No. 32-29 

(Defendant Anglin’s counsel in the Gersh Action stating that “a change in domain name does not alter 

the content of a website, but rather the path a web browser takes to access that content”).

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 13 of 24 PAGEID #: 420
Page 9 of 18

registration, some of these subsequent registrations reflect that “Andrew Anglin” registered the 

domains on behalf of Defendant Moonbase, and the address provided is PO Box 208. See, e.g., Ex. 25, 

DS’s .TOP WhoIs.

On January 16, 2018, after it was properly served with the Summons and Complaint in this 

action, Defendant Moonbase filed a change of address for its agent for service. Ex. 27, Moonbase’s 

Agent Address Change, at 1 (noting change of agent’s address effective Jan. 16, 2018). Rather than 

Greg Anglin’s Office, all future service on Defendant Moonbase was to be directed to PO Box 208—

i.e., the post office box that Greg Anglin established for Defendant Moonbase (d/b/a “Andrew 

Anglin”) and is solely authorized to retrieve mail from. Id. at 3. The change of address form was 

executed by “Karen Zappitelli” on behalf of “Zappitelli CPA Inc.,” which represented itself as an 

“authorized representative” of Defendant Moonbase. Id. at 4. The Certificate was subsequently 

mailed to Defendant Moonbase, courtesy of Karen Zappitelli, at the business address for Zappitelli 

CPAs. Id. at 1.

II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Courts enjoy “broad discretion” to order discovery. Arista Records, LLC v. Does 1-15, No. 1:07-

cv-450, 2007 WL 5254326, at *3 (W.D. Mich. Nov. 5, 2007). While the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure anticipate that discovery will typically not begin “before the parties have conferred as 

required as required by Rule 26(f),” they allow for discovery prior to the Rule 26(f) conference “by 

court order.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d); see also Arista Records, 2007 WL 5254326, at *2. This provision 

requires that the party requesting expedited discovery show “good cause,” which “may be found where 

the need for expedited discovery, in consideration of the administration of justice, outweighs the 

prejudice to the responding party.” Arista Records, 2007 WL 5254326, at *2 (internal quotations and 

citations omitted). Courts have regularly found good cause to authorize such discovery when, inter 

alia, a defendant defaults and the plaintiff needs discovery in order to establish liability and/or damages 

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 14 of 24 PAGEID #: 421
Page 10 of 18

in pursuit of default judgment. See, e.g., Twitch Interactive, Inc. v. Johnston, No. 5:16-cv-03404-BLF, 2017 

WL 1133520, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2017) (authorizing discovery in aid of forthcoming motion for 

default judgment from payment processors, financial institutions, and co-defendant); Antoine v. Boutte, 

No. 3:15-cv-00561-JWD-EWD, 2016 WL 6138252, at *4 (M.D. La. Oct. 20, 2016) (same from thirdparty distributors regarding quantum of damages); Adobe Sys. Inc. v. Bunhey, No. 5:13-cv-01365-VAPOP, 2013 WL 12140304, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 29, 2013) (same from third-party distributors regarding 

defaulting defendant’s purchase, sale, and/or distribution of counterfeit products); Texas Guaranteed 

Student Loan Corp. v. Dhindsa, No. 1:10-cv-00335-LJO-SKO, 2010 WL 2353520, at *3 (E.D. Cal. June 

9, 2010) (same from defaulting defendant regarding quantum of damages); Sheridan v. Oak Street Mortg., 

LLC, 244 F.R.D. 520, 522 (E.D. Wis. 2007) (same regarding class certification and quantum of 

damages).

III. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR DISCOVERY IN AID OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

AGAINST DEFENDANT MOONBASE

The Court should grant Mr. Obeidallah leave to take limited discovery in aid of a forthcoming 

motion for default judgment against Defendant Moonbase because doing so is necessary for purposes 

of: (1) developing facts supporting the immediate need for entry of judgment against Defendant 

Moonbase; (2) determining how liability ought to be apportioned among Defendant Moonbase and 

the other defendants; and (3) establishing Defendant Moonbase’s malice and determining the amount 

of Mr. Obeidallah’s damages attributable to Defendant Moonbase.

A. Discovery will aid Mr. Obeidallah in arguing exigent circumstances warrant

the immediate entry of default judgment against Defendant Moonbase.

Mr. Obeidallah intends to request that the Court enter immediate default judgment against 

Defendant Moonbase based on an exigent circumstance; namely, Defendant Moonbase’s impending 

insolvency. Although there is some evidence suggesting Defendant Moonbase is now on the cusp of

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 15 of 24 PAGEID #: 422
Page 11 of 18

insolvency, establishing such insolvency without limited discovery regarding Defendant Moonbase’s 

finances is difficult. 

Understanding the finances of Defendant Moonbase is necessary because the Sixth Circuit has 

adopted the so-called “Frow rule,” which states that when default is entered against one of several 

defendants, the “preferred practice” is to “withhold granting a default judgment until the trial of the 

action on the merits against the remaining defendants.” Kimberly v. Coastline Coal Corp., No. 87-6199, 

1988 WL 93305, at *3 (6th Cir. Sept. 9, 1988) (citation omitted) (interpreting Frow v. De La Vega, 82 

U.S. 552 (1872)). However, courts have recognized an exception to the Frow rule where the exigency 

of a defaulting defendant’s insolvency (or impending insolvency) warrants the immediate entry of 

default judgment. See Lucas v. Jolin, No. 1:15-cv-00108-TSB-SKB, 2015 WL 7292836 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 

29, 2015) (finding risk of insolvency from recent entry of judgment in another case “provides an 

adequate basis alone for” the immediate entry of default judgment), report and recommendation adopted, 

No. 1:15-cv-00108-TSB-SKB, 2015 WL 7276808 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 18, 2015) (granting immediate entry 

of default judgment); see also Lucas v. Telemarketer Calling from (407) 476-5680, No. 1:12-cv-00630-TSBSKB, 2014 WL 5308573, at *2 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 16, 2014) (granting immediate default judgment 

because “[i]nsolvency . . . is a genuine risk, and the interests of justice would seem to dictate allowing 

Plaintiff to begin enforcement proceedings sooner than later” because “if a judgment against [the 

defaulting defendant] is postponed, Plaintiff may lose what little ability he has to collect against it”); 

Int'l Gemmological Inst., Inc. v. Rafaeil, No. 1:05-cv-02395-JGK-JCF, 2005 WL 3880222, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. 

Aug. 17, 2005) (finding that the balance of interests favored entry of default judgment despite Frow, 

since postponing a determination of damages would “delay—and perhaps jeopardize—[plaintiff's] 

recovery,” giving the defaulting defendants “ample opportunity to spend, secrete, or otherwise protect 

their ill-gotten gains”).

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 16 of 24 PAGEID #: 423
Page 12 of 18

Evidence collected during discovery will likely establish that immediate entry of default 

judgment against Defendant Moonbase is warranted because it is—in fact— insolvent, or on the cusp 

of insolvency, and Mr. Obeidallah will lose his ability to recover damages from Defendant Moonbase

unless permitted to begin enforcement proceedings very soon. As explained above in Part I.A-B, 

Defendant Moonbase appears to serve as a front through which Defendant Anglin and Greg Anglin 

funnel donations from the Daily Stormer’s readership. It is not clear whether Defendant Moonbase 

possesses assets other than those pass-through donations. At one point it appeared that Defendant 

Moonbase received approximately $3,405.70 per month in credit card donations through Hatreon, 

but this source of funding was discontinued in early-February 2017 due to Hatreon’s inability to 

continue processing contributions. Defendant Moonbase (d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”) also apparently 

received mailed donations at PO Box 208, but Defendant Anglin thereafter announced this method 

of fundraising was no longer possible when the post office box at which Defendant Moonbase (d/b/a 

“Andrew Anglin”) was receiving contributions in late-October 2017 was shut down.

Contemporaneous with the cessation of Defendant Moonbase’s funds through Hatreon, 

Defendant Anglin announced that his “money is basically dried up.” Defendant Anglin attributed this 

loss of funds to expenditures on legal fees he has incurred, likely in relation to the Gersh Action, the 

only lawsuit in which he has entered an appearance. Defendant Anglin claimed that he had “raised 

160K with a 15% fee”—i.e., $136,000—but has spent it on “lawyer travel, motions, research, 

discovery, [and] local counsel.” Ex. 19, Three Gab Messages From Early 2018, at 2. He then claimed

that he has “no way of receiving anything other than crypto right now,” id. at 1, which is likely a 

reference to “cryptocurrency,” a “form of currency that only exists digitally . . . [and] usually has no 

central issuing or regulating authority but instead uses a decentralized system to record transactions.” 

Merriam-Webster, Cryptocurrency, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cryptocurrency 

(Mar. 18, 2018). For example, the Daily Stormer has recently begun requesting its readership to submit 

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 17 of 24 PAGEID #: 424
Page 13 of 18

donations through Monero, a cryptocurrency that claims to use “ring signatures, ring confidential 

transactions, and stealth addresses to obfuscate the origins, amounts, and destinations of all 

transactions.” Monero, https://getmonero.org (last visited Mar. 25, 2018); see also Ex. 28, DS’s 

Contributions, at 1–2 (requesting Monero contributions).

Moreover, the probability that Defendant Moonbase will be rendered insolvent (if it is not 

already) has greatly increased as a result of its default in another federal action pending in the U.S. 

District Court for the Western District of Virginia. See Entry of Default, Sines v. Kessler, No. 3:17-cv00072-NKM-JCH (W.D. Va. Mar. 14, 2018), ECF No. 268 (the “Sines Action”). The Sines Action was 

filed October 11, 2017, approximately two months after Mr. Obeidallah filed his complaint. The clerk 

in the Sines Action entered default against Defendants Anglin and Moonbase on March 14, 2018. If 

the plaintiffs in Sines quickly obtain default judgment against Defendant Moonbase, then 

Mr. Obeidallah will be severely prejudiced in his ability to recover despite his being the first-filed 

action.

Based on the foregoing facts, Defendant Moonbase appears drained of all available resources 

by Defendant Anglin and Greg Anglin. However, in order to establish this fact with certainty, 

Mr. Obeidallah respectfully requests leave to take limited discovery on the issue. For example, while 

there is strong circumstantial evidence that Defendant Moonbase was receiving donations through 

Hatreon (because the entity had a prior role processing credit card donations from the Daily Stormer’s 

readership), Mr. Obeidallah requires discovery to confirm this relationship. Moreover, discovery will 

reveal whether Defendant Moonbase is still able to receive Hatreon donations. Mr. Obeidallah must 

also confirm whether Defendant Moonbase has retained control of any previously-received donations, 

or whether Defendant Anglin and Greg Anglin simply used Defendant Moonbase as a front through 

which they passed donations from the Daily Stormer’s readership. 

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 18 of 24 PAGEID #: 425
Page 14 of 18

To answer these and similar questions, which are important to Mr. Obeidallah’s forthcoming 

motion for default judgment against Defendant Moonbase, Mr. Obeidallah respectfully seeks leave to 

issue narrowly-tailored subpoenas duces tecum, and deposition subpoenas, to: (1) Greg Anglin; and 

(2) Zappitelli CPAs. The proposed subpoenas are attached hereto as Exhibit 1. As explained below, 

good cause exists for such discovery because Greg Anglin and Zappitelli CPAs have both acted as

“representatives” of Defendant Moonbase and they are both likely to have information highly relevant 

to determining whether Defendant Moonbase is insolvent. Additionally, Mr. Obeidallah cannot 

obtain such information from other sources because: (1) Defendant Moonbase is in default, and thus 

unlikely to respond to discovery requests; and (2) Defendant Anglin, who has also acted as Defendant 

Moonbase’s representative, is apparently evading service of the Summons and Complaint and 

therefore Mr. Obeidallah has no way of serving him with discovery requests. 

With regard to Greg Anglin, the evidence discussed above in Part I shows that Greg Anglin is 

a legally-authorized representative of Defendant Moonbase who is deeply familiar with its operations, 

including its finances. Greg Anglin’s Office was originally listed as the address at which all service of 

process for Defendant Moonbase should be directed. The Daily Stormer’s readership was likewise 

directed to send cash, checks, and money orders to Greg Anglin’s Office. The office’s occupants had 

no knowledge of Defendant Anglin, but stated Greg Anglin regularly retrieved mail from that office, 

suggesting Greg Anglin was receiving service and donations on Defendant Moonbase’s behalf. Greg 

Anglin thereafter signed the trade name registration for “Andrew Anglin” as Defendant Anglin’s 

“authorized representative.” Following initiation of the Gersh Action, Greg Anglin appears to have 

established PO Box 208 on Defendant Moonbase’s behalf (d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”). Greg Anglin 

used his name, business address, telephone number, and email address for purpose of the registration, 

and listed himself as the only individual authorized to retrieve mail from PO Box 208 on behalf of 

Defendant Moonbase (d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”). Defendant Anglin thereafter directed the Daily 

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 19 of 24 PAGEID #: 426
Page 15 of 18

Stormer’s readership to send donation to PO Box 208 which Greg Anglin, as the only person authorized 

to retrieve mail from that post office box, apparently received on behalf of Defendant Moonbase 

(d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”). 

As for Zappitelli CPAs, the available evidence discussed above in Part I similarly shows that 

Zappitelli CPAs is a legally-authorized representative of Defendant Moonbase who is likely familiar 

with its finances. 9 First, Zappitelli CPAs appears to have been Defendant Moonbase’s longtime 

certified public accountant, having been the designated recipient for Defendant Moonbase’s Articles 

of Organization when it was established in early-September 2016, and having most recently executed 

in mid-January 2018 a change of address form as Defendant Moonbase’s “authorized representative.” 

Second, as certified public accountants Zappitelli CPAs likely has significant relevant information 

regarding Defendant Moonbase’s finances. Indeed, the firm advertises services such as: 

(1) “[c]ashflow analysis”; (2) “[f]orecasts/projects”; (3) [b]usiness appraisals and valuations; 

(4) [g]eneral bookkeeping services; and (5) “[p]reperation of . . . LLC . . . federal, state and city 

returns.” Zappitelli CPAs Inc., Services, http://zappitellicpasinc.com/services (last visited Mar. 19, 

2018). These facts, taken together, suggest Zappitelli CPAs possesses information highly relevant to 

determining whether Defendant Moonbase is insolvent, or on the cusp of becoming insolvent.

B. Discovery will aid Mr. Obeidallah in detailing apportionment of liability among 

defendants.

Good cause also exists for Mr. Obeidallah’s request for leave to pursue the discovery set forth 

in Exhibit 1, because discovery is likely to uncover evidence relevant to apportioning liability among 

Defendant Moonbase and the other defendants. In order to grant Mr. Obeidallah’s forthcoming 

motion for immediate entry of default judgment, the Court will likely evaluate what portion of such 

 

9 The Ohio Secretary of State’s records reflect that “Zappitelli CPAs, Inc.” is a fictitious name under 

which the registrant, Jon J. Zappitelli, CPA, Inc. (“Jon J. Zappitelli CPA”), conducts business. As a 

result, Plaintiff would direct the limited discovery requested herein to Jon J. Zappitelli CPA. 

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 20 of 24 PAGEID #: 427
Page 16 of 18

liability is appropriately apportioned to Defendant Moonbase. See, e.g., Munhwa Broad. Corp. v. Create 

New Tech. Co., No. 2:14-cv-04213-RGK-PJW, 2015 WL 12749448, at *5 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 2, 2015) 

(granting default judgment against one of several defendants where the defendant was jointly and 

severally liable, and calculating the defendant’s share of the damages by referencing plaintiff’s expert 

testimony). As a result, the Court should grant Mr. Obeidallah leave to take limited discovery in aid 

of determining, inter alia, the extent to which: (1) Defendant Moonbase is responsible for the 

publication and republication of the Defamatory Article and other culpable conduct alleged in the 

Complaint; and (2) Greg Anglin, Defendant Anglin, and/or third parties (e.g., the Doe Defendants) 

act on Defendant Moonbase’s behalf for purpose of assessing agency and vicarious liability.

Good cause exists for directing such discovery requests to Greg Anglin. There is some 

evidence that Defendant Moonbase serves as an alter ego for Defendant Anglin and Greg Anglin. As 

such, Greg Anglin is likely knowledgeable about Defendant Moonbase’s role in the publication, and 

subsequent republication, of the Defamatory Article. For example, Greg Anglin has executed 

numerous documents as Defendant Moonbase’s representative since its establishment in December 

2016. He also appears to have received mail directed to Defendant Moonbase, including service of 

process and donations from the Daily Stormer’s readership, at his office address. When Greg Anglin’s 

association with the Daily Stormer became public he resorted to establishing PO Box 208, apparently 

on Defendant Moonbase’s behalf (d/b/a “Andrew Anglin”), so that he could continue receiving those 

donations. Greg Anglin also registered the Daily Stormer’s original “.com” domain, and presumably 

authorized the filing of an amended registration for that “.com” domain changing the registrant to 

“Andrew Anglin” on behalf of Defendant Moonbase with an associated address of PO Box 208—the 

same address that Greg Anglin established, and which has been used for numerous of the later 

domains at which the Defamatory Article was republished. 

C. Discovery will aid Mr. Obeidallah in establishing Defendant Moonbase’s 

malice and the quantum of damages attributable to Defendant Moonbase.

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 21 of 24 PAGEID #: 428
Page 17 of 18

The discovery that Mr. Obeidallah seeks leave to take will further aid in establishing: 

(1) Defendant Moonbase’s malice; and (2) the quantum of damages attributable to Defendant 

Moonbase. Mr. Obeidallah’s forthcoming motion for default judgment against Defendant Moonbase 

must establish malice, or a reckless disregard for the truth, in support of its claims for defamation. 

While this element is definitively established by Mr. Obeidallah’s well-pled complaint, the allegations 

of which are taken as true upon Defendant Moonbase’s default, it is nonetheless an issue that would 

find further support in evidence revealing Defendant Moonbase’s republication of the Defamatory 

Article. See, e.g., Austin v. Remington, 46 Conn. 116, 118 (1878) (“Any evidence which goes to show that 

the slander has again and again been repeated is competent to prove malice. The greater length of time 

in which the defendant has repeated his publications evinces that his words have not been the result 

of passion, and shows deliberate purpose to injure the plaintiff.”). Defendant Moonbase’s 

republication is also relevant to the quantum of damages attributable to Defendant Moonbase. See, 

e.g., Funk v. Lincoln-Lancaster Cty. Crime Stoppers, Inc., 885 N.W.2d 1, 12 (Neb. 2016) (holding that the 

republication of a defamatory article by linking the article via Facebook is material in determining 

damages). 

As discussed above, there is evidence that Defendant Moonbase has participated in the 

republication of the Defamatory Article at least three (3) times. See supra Part 1.C. Evidence of 

republication is based on registrant information for the Daily Stormer’s “.ai” and “.top” domains, both 

of which reflect registration by “Andrew Anglin” on behalf of Defendant Moonbase. See id. But, the 

Defamatory Article was republished at approximately fourteen (14) of the Daily Stormer’s other web 

domains. Unfortunately, Mr. Obeidallah cannot discern registrant information for these domains 

because: (1) the domains deleted registrant information when the Daily Stormer was banned; or (2)

Defendants recently took measures to obfuscate this information. Good cause therefore exists to 

seek discovery.

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 22 of 24 PAGEID #: 429
Page 18 of 18

IV. REQUEST FOR RELIEF

For these reasons, Mr. Obeidallah respectfully moves this Court pursuant to Rule 26(d)(1) of 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for leave to take limited discovery in aid of Mr. Obeidallah’s 

forthcoming motion for default judgment against Moonbase. The requests for production and matters 

for examination, which Mr. Obeidallah proposes directing to Greg Anglin and Zappitelli CPAs, are 

attached as Exhibit 1.

Respectfully submitted,

DATED: 03/26/2018 /s/ Abid R. Qureshi 

Subodh Chandra (OH Bar No. 0069233)

Donald Screen (OH Bar No. 0044070)

THE CHANDRA LAW FIRM LLC

1265 W. 6th St., Suite 400

Cleveland, OH 44113-1326

Phone: 216.578.1700 Fx: 216.578.1800

Subodh.Chandra@ChandraLaw.com

Donald.Screen@ChandraLaw.com

Johnathan Smith (D.C. Bar No. 1029373)

Juvaria Khan (N.Y. Bar No. 5027461)

MUSLIM ADVOCATES

P.O. Box 66408

Washington, D.C. 20035

Phone: 202.897.1894

johnathan@muslimadvocates.org

juvaria@muslimadvocates.org

Admitted pro hac vice

Abid R. Qureshi (D.C. Bar No. 459227)

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

555 Eleventh St., NW, Suite 1000

Washington, D.C. 20004-1304

Phone: 202.637.2200 Fx: 202.637.2201

abid.qureshi@lw.com

Admitted pro hac vice

Attorneys for Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 23 of 24 PAGEID #: 430
Page 1 of 1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that I served this motion, memorandum, and all attachments thereto on Defendant 

Moonbase Holdings, LLC by first class mail directed to:

Moonbase Holdings, LLC

C/O Andrew B. Anglin

PO Box 208

Worthington, OH 43085

I further certify that I transmitted copies of this motion, memorandum, and all attachments 

thereto to the Clerk of the Court for purpose of serving Defendant Andrew B. Anglin and the Doe 

Defendants because those defendants have no known address.

DATED: 03/26/2018 /s/ Abid R. Qureshi 

Abid R. Qureshi (D.C. Bar No. 459227)

LATHAM & WATKINS LLP

555 Eleventh St., NW, Suite 1000

Washington, D.C. 20004-1304

Phone: 202.637.2200 Fx: 202.637.2201

abid.qureshi@lw.com

Attorney for Plaintiff Dean Obeidallah

Admitted pro hac vice

Case: 2:17-cv-00720-EAS-EPD Doc #: 31 Filed: 03/26/18 Page: 24 of 24 PAGEID #: 431