{"cached_at":"2026-09-10T09:50:08.231657+00:00","cl_docket_id":"67570049","docket":{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","id":67570049,"court":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/courts/nvd/","court_id":"nvd","original_court_info":null,"idb_data":null,"clusters":["https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/clusters/10191447/"],"audio_files":[],"assigned_to":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/people/338/","referred_to":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/people/9412/","bankruptcy_information":null,"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2023-07-08T10:24:48.602711-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-05T15:45:29.388765-07:00","source":1,"appeal_from_str":"","assigned_to_str":"Richard F. Boulware II","referred_to_str":"Brenda Weksler","panel_str":"","date_last_index":"2024-06-26T02:18:14.724304-07:00","date_cert_granted":null,"date_cert_denied":null,"date_argued":null,"date_reargued":null,"date_reargument_denied":null,"date_filed":"2023-07-08","date_terminated":null,"date_last_filing":"2026-06-09","case_name_short":"","case_name":"In re Marathon Digital Holdings, Inc. Derivative Litigation","case_name_full":"","slug":"in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation","docket_number":"2:23-cv-01055","docket_number_core":"2301055","docket_number_raw":"2:23-cv-01055","docket_number_source":0,"federal_dn_office_code":"2","federal_dn_case_type":"cv","federal_dn_judge_initials_assigned":"RFB","federal_dn_judge_initials_referred":"BNW","federal_defendant_number":null,"pacer_case_id":"163286","cause":"15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act","nature_of_suit":"850 Securities/Commodities","jury_demand":"Both","jurisdiction_type":"Federal Question","appellate_fee_status":"","appellate_case_type_information":"","mdl_status":"","filepath_ia":"","filepath_ia_json":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"ia_needs_upload":true,"ia_date_first_change":"2023-07-08T10:24:48.601807-07:00","date_blocked":null,"blocked":false,"appeal_from":null,"parent_docket":null,"tags":[],"panel":[]},"parties":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/15261777/","id":15261777,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228912/","attorney_id":10228912,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228912/","attorney_id":10228912,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228912/","attorney_id":10228912,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/8543487/","attorney_id":8543487,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642186/","attorney_id":9642186,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2025-04-02T11:05:25.717221-07:00","date_modified":"2025-04-02T11:05:25.717232-07:00","name":"Dennis Jaffee","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/13424599/","id":13424599,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/8543487/","attorney_id":8543487,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/8543487/","attorney_id":8543487,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642187/","attorney_id":9642187,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642187/","attorney_id":9642187,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642187/","attorney_id":9642187,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642186/","attorney_id":9642186,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642186/","attorney_id":9642186,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2024-03-05T17:46:06.930068-08:00","date_modified":"2024-03-05T17:46:06.930079-08:00","name":"Gary Konigsberg","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767804/","id":12767804,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642186/","attorney_id":9642186,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Nominal Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.224403-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.224424-07:00","name":"Marathon Digital Holdings, INC.","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767803/","id":12767803,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.213943-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.213951-07:00","name":"Hugh J. Gallagher","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767802/","id":12767802,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.197331-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.197351-07:00","name":"Doug Mellinger","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767801/","id":12767801,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.189695-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.189704-07:00","name":"Said Ouissal","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767800/","id":12767800,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.182344-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.182367-07:00","name":"Jay Leupp","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767799/","id":12767799,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.173028-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.173037-07:00","name":"Sarita James","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767798/","id":12767798,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.164223-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.164245-07:00","name":"Kevin Denuccio","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767797/","id":12767797,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.151933-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.151955-07:00","name":"Georges Antoun","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767796/","id":12767796,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.138818-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.138826-07:00","name":"Simeon Salzman","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767795/","id":12767795,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.122707-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.122731-07:00","name":"Merrick Okamoto","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767794/","id":12767794,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10228913/","attorney_id":10228913,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027508/","attorney_id":9027508,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235216/","attorney_id":10235216,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027509/","attorney_id":9027509,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10433619/","attorney_id":10433619,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/10235217/","attorney_id":10235217,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":"2025-03-26","docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":6},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027510/","attorney_id":9027510,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9027511/","attorney_id":9027511,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Defendant","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.100783-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:19.100794-07:00","name":"Frederick G. Thiel","extra_info":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/parties/12767793/","id":12767793,"attorneys":[{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642185/","attorney_id":9642185,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":4},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642185/","attorney_id":9642185,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642185/","attorney_id":9642185,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642186/","attorney_id":9642186,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":2},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/9642186/","attorney_id":9642186,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1},{"attorney":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/attorneys/8543487/","attorney_id":8543487,"date_action":null,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"role":1}],"party_types":[{"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","docket_id":67570049,"name":"Plaintiff","date_terminated":null,"extra_info":"","highest_offense_level_opening":"","highest_offense_level_terminated":"","criminal_counts":[],"criminal_complaints":[]}],"date_created":"2023-07-17T18:56:18.978512-07:00","date_modified":"2023-07-17T18:56:18.978523-07:00","name":"Steve Hood","extra_info":""}],"entries":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/466800040/","id":466800040,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/482047981/","id":482047981,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/100/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2026-06-09T09:21:17.513904-07:00","date_modified":"2026-06-09T09:21:17.524724-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"100","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011525360","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice Change of Address","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-06-09T09:21:17.459083-07:00","date_modified":"2026-06-09T09:21:17.476353-07:00","date_filed":"2026-06-09","time_filed":"09:01:40","entry_number":100,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-06-09.001","pacer_sequence_number":379,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/466038788/","id":466038788,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/481260740/","id":481260740,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/99/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2026-06-02T12:24:35.207168-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-08T06:48:27.779856-07:00","sha1":"310441353f11ec4558b24a2402b1d997522fecb4","page_count":4,"file_size":387065,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286.99.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286.99.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":" Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 99 Filed 06/01/26 Page 1 of 4\n\n\n1\n\n2 FLANGAS LAW GROUP PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &\n KIMBERLY P. STEIN GARRISON LLP\n3 Email: kps@fdlawlv.com ANDREW J. EHRLICH (pro hac vice)\n4 3275 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 105 DANIEL S. SINNREICH (pro hac vice)\n Las Vegas, NV 89146 KEVIN P. MADDEN (pro hac vice)\n5 Telephone: (702) 307-9500 1285 Avenue of the Americas\n New York, NY 10019-6064\n6 PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & Telephone: 212.373.3000\n GARRISON LLP aehrlich@paulweiss.com\n7 MATTHEW D. STACHEL (pro hac vice) dsinnreich@paulweiss.com\n 1313 North Market Street, Suite 806 kmadden@paulweiss.com\n8\n Wilmington, DE 19801-0032\n9 Telephone: 302.655.4410\n mstachel@paulweiss.com Attorneys for Defendants\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n14\n DISTRICT OF NEVADA\n15\n\n16\n IN RE MARATHON DIGITAL HOLDINGS Case No. 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW\n17 DERIVATIVE LITIGATION\n MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND BE\n18 REMOVED AS ATTORNEY OF\n RECORD AND ORDER\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 99 Filed 06/01/26 Page 2 of 4\n\n\n1\n\n2 Kimberly P. Stein, of the law firm of Flangas Law Group, attorneys for defendants\n\n3 Antoun, DeNuccio, Gallagher, James, Leupp, Mellinger, Okamoto, Ouissal, Salzman, and Thiel,\n\n4 and Nominal Defendant MARA Holdings, Inc., f/k/a Marathon Digital Holdings Inc.\n\n5 (\u201cMarathon\u201d or the \u201cCompany,\u201d and collectively, \u201cDefendants\u201d), hereby files this Motion for\n\n6 Andrew J. Ehrlich to Withdraw or be Removed as Attorney of Record as Andrew J. Ehrlich\n\n7 (\u201cMr. Ehrlich\u201d).\n\n8 The basis for this Motion is that Mr. Ehrlich will depart Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton &\n\n9 Garrison LLP, as of May 31, 2026, and will no longer be associated with this case, Case No.\n\n10 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW. Yet, Defendants continue to be represented by the law firms of\n\n11 Flangas Law Group; and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP. As such, Mr. Ehrlich\n\n12 no longer needs to receive any further notification in this proceeding.\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 99 Filed 06/01/26 Page 3 of 4\n\n\n1\n\n2 WHEREFORE, Kimberly P. Stein, Esq. requests that this Court enter its order allowing\n\n3 Mr. Ehrlich to withdraw and be removed as attorney of record and remove Mr. Ehrlich from\n\n4 future CM/ECF notices as generated by the United States District Court for the District of\n\n5 Nevada based on his email aehrlich@paulweiss.com.\n\n6 Dated this 29th day of May 2026.\n\n7 FLANGAS LAW GROUP\n8\n\n9 By: /s/ Kimberly P. Stein\n KIMBERLY P. STEIN, ESQ.\n10\n Nevada Bar No. 8495\n11 3275 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 105\n Las Vegas, NV 89146\n12 Attorney for Defendants\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16 ORDER\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n IT IS SO ORDERED:\n20\n June 1, 2026\n DATED: ____________\n21\n\n22 BRENDA WEKSLER\n23 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\n\n\n -2-\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 99 Filed 06/01/26 Page 4 of 4\n\n\n\n\n1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n2 I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that on the 29th day of May, 2026, that I\n3 electronically filed the above and foregoing document MOTION FOR ANDREW J.\n4 EHRLICH TO WITHDRAW OR BE REMOVED AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD AND\n5 ORDER using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of electronic filling to all CM/ECF\n6 registrants.\n7 Dated: May 29, 2026\n8\n /s/Ronnielyn Abrera\n9\n An employee of Flangas Law Group\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2026-07-05T12:06:04.305261-07:00","document_number":"99","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011513943","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":true,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order AND Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-06-02T12:24:35.172473-07:00","date_modified":"2026-07-05T12:05:52.931258-07:00","date_filed":"2026-06-01","time_filed":"11:45:37","entry_number":99,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-06-02.001","pacer_sequence_number":374,"description":" ORDER Granting 98 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney by Andrew J. Ehrlich. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler on 6/1/2026. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ALZ)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/465719864/","id":465719864,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/480930432/","id":480930432,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/98/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2026-05-29T16:23:48.556019-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-29T16:23:48.562965-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"98","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011510043","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Motion Withdraw as Attorney","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-05-29T16:23:48.531328-07:00","date_modified":"2026-05-29T16:23:48.538043-07:00","date_filed":"2026-05-29","time_filed":"16:02:50","entry_number":98,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-05-29.001","pacer_sequence_number":372,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/456922564/","id":456922564,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/471895069/","id":471895069,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/97/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2026-03-12T09:21:05.115371-07:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T09:21:05.128641-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"97","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011374553","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Transcript","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-03-12T09:21:05.076767-07:00","date_modified":"2026-03-12T09:21:05.085996-07:00","date_filed":"2026-03-12","time_filed":"08:34:37","entry_number":97,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-03-12.001","pacer_sequence_number":369,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/453830137/","id":453830137,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/468729881/","id":468729881,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2026-02-13T10:41:13.187171-08:00","date_modified":"2026-02-13T10:41:13.194411-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Motion Hearing","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-02-13T10:41:13.172643-08:00","date_modified":"2026-02-13T10:41:13.172657-08:00","date_filed":"2026-02-13","time_filed":"10:15:15","entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-02-13.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/450656207/","id":450656207,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/465478370/","id":465478370,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2026-01-16T15:21:42.798846-08:00","date_modified":"2026-01-16T15:21:42.810733-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Minute Order Setting Hearing on Motion","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-01-16T15:21:42.784154-08:00","date_modified":"2026-01-16T15:21:42.784173-08:00","date_filed":"2026-01-16","time_filed":"15:08:22","entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-01-16.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/449573044/","id":449573044,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/464369694/","id":464369694,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/94/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2026-01-07T14:50:21.410213-08:00","date_modified":"2026-01-07T14:50:21.420161-08:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"94","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011267244","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice Other","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2026-01-07T14:50:21.341008-08:00","date_modified":"2026-01-07T14:50:21.349860-08:00","date_filed":"2026-01-07","time_filed":"13:48:53","entry_number":94,"recap_sequence_number":"2026-01-07.001","pacer_sequence_number":362,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/435324626/","id":435324626,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/449736182/","id":449736182,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/92/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-08-20T14:24:46.395031-07:00","date_modified":"2025-08-20T14:24:46.406005-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"92","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011069660","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Reply","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-08-20T14:24:46.346859-07:00","date_modified":"2025-08-20T14:24:46.355856-07:00","date_filed":"2025-08-20","time_filed":"14:14:48","entry_number":92,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-08-20.001","pacer_sequence_number":356,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/435324617/","id":435324617,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/449736171/","id":449736171,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/93/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-08-20T14:24:46.180593-07:00","date_modified":"2025-08-20T14:24:46.186835-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"93","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011069665","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Response","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-08-20T14:24:46.149049-07:00","date_modified":"2025-08-20T14:24:46.156511-07:00","date_filed":"2025-08-20","time_filed":"14:17:04","entry_number":93,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-08-20.001","pacer_sequence_number":359,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/433487606/","id":433487606,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/447840608/","id":447840608,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/91/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-08-01T14:20:01.982960-07:00","date_modified":"2025-08-01T14:20:01.985967-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"91","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011042311","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Notice Other","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-08-01T14:20:01.968990-07:00","date_modified":"2025-08-01T14:20:01.972246-07:00","date_filed":"2025-08-01","time_filed":"13:52:34","entry_number":91,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-08-01.001","pacer_sequence_number":352,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/433456468/","id":433456468,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/447808738/","id":447808738,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/90/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-08-01T11:23:32.416229-07:00","date_modified":"2025-08-01T11:23:32.419190-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"90","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011041777","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Errata","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-08-01T11:23:32.400579-07:00","date_modified":"2025-08-01T11:23:32.405429-07:00","date_filed":"2025-08-01","time_filed":"10:55:09","entry_number":90,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-08-01.001","pacer_sequence_number":349,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/432113011/","id":432113011,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/446433936/","id":446433936,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/88/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-07-21T16:30:08.058958-07:00","date_modified":"2025-07-21T16:30:08.069289-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"88","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011025784","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Response","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-07-21T16:30:07.967836-07:00","date_modified":"2025-07-21T16:30:07.975352-07:00","date_filed":"2025-07-21","time_filed":"15:25:09","entry_number":88,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-07-21.001","pacer_sequence_number":343,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/432113006/","id":432113006,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/446433931/","id":446433931,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/89/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-07-21T16:30:07.092701-07:00","date_modified":"2025-07-21T16:30:07.099509-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"89","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115011025792","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Request Judicial Notice","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-07-21T16:30:07.059685-07:00","date_modified":"2025-07-21T16:30:07.068253-07:00","date_filed":"2025-07-21","time_filed":"15:26:36","entry_number":89,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-07-21.001","pacer_sequence_number":346,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/426012498/","id":426012498,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/440169617/","id":440169617,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/86/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-05-20T15:22:38.909299-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-24T02:26:34.836940-07:00","sha1":"5561f708487cf599ee4d2e70154ec4994d7cffcf","page_count":27,"file_size":289581,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286.86.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286.86.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":" Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 1 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 FLANGAS LAW GROUP\n KIMBERLY P. STEIN\n 2 Nevada Bar No. 8675\n Email: kps@fdlawlv.com\n 3 3275 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 105\n Las Vegas, NV 89146\n 4 Telephone: (702) 307-9500\n 5\n PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &\n 6 GARRISON LLP\n ANDREW J. EHRLICH (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n 7 New York Bar No. 4103909\n Email: aehrlich@paulweiss.com\n 8 DANIEL S. SINNREICH (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n 9 New York Bar No. 5192497\n Email: dsinnreich@paulweiss.com\n10 KEVIN P. MADDEN (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n New York Bar No. 5990049\n11 Email: kmadden@paulweiss.com\n 1285 Avenue of the Americas\n12 New York, NY 10019-6064\n13 Telephone: (212) 373-3000\n\n14 MATTHEW D. STACHEL (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n Delaware Bar No. 5419\n15 Email: mstachel@paulweiss.com\n 1313 North Market Street, Suite 806\n16 Wilmington, DE 19801-0032\n17 Telephone: (302) 655-4410\n\n18 Attorneys for Defendants\n\n19\n20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n21 DISTRICT OF NEVADA\n22\n\n23 IN RE MARATHON DIGITAL HOLDINGS Lead Case No: 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW\n DERIVATIVE LITIGATION\n24\n\n25 This Document Relates to: MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS\u2019\n ALL ACTIONS SECOND VERIFIED CONSOLIDATED\n26 AMENDED SHAREHOLDER\n DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT\n27\n\n28\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 2 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 Defendants Antoun, DeNuccio, Gallagher, James, Leupp, Mellinger, Okamoto,\n\n 2 Ouissal, Salzman, and Thiel, and Nominal Defendant MARA Holdings, Inc., f/k/a\n\n 3 Marathon Digital Holdings Inc. (\u201cMarathon\u201d or the \u201cCompany,\u201d and collectively,\n\n 4 \u201cDefendants\u201d), by and through their counsel of record, move to dismiss the Second\n\n 5 Verified Consolidated Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint (the \u201cSAC\u201d), ECF No.\n\n 6 68, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23.1 and 12(b)(6) and Nevada law. This\n\n 7 motion is made and based upon the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the\n\n 8 Declaration of Kimberly P. Stein (\u201cStein Declaration\u201d), the Stein Declaration exhibits, the\n\n 9 pleadings and papers on file, and any oral argument the Court may consider.\n\n10 Dated this 20th day of May 2025.\n\n11 FLANGAS LAW GROUP\n /s/Kimberly P. Stein\n12 Kimberly P. Stein\n13 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES\n14 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT\n15 The Court properly dismissed the first iteration of this stockholder derivative case\n16 for Plaintiffs\u2019 failure to plead particularized facts demonstrating that making demand on\n17 Marathon\u2019s Board\u2014the proper course for stockholder complaints like this one, rather than\n18 rushing into court, as they have\u2014was futile. This Court warned Plaintiffs, when\n19 dismissing the First Amended Complaint (\u201cFAC\u201d), that they would have only \u201cone\n20 additional opportunity to amend.\u201d The SAC squanders that opportunity and fails to cure\n21 any of the FAC\u2019s defects. The SAC persists in advancing the same strained and illogical\n22 theories that the directors were supposedly unable to independently entertain a stockholder\n23 demand, now just seasoned haphazardly with a handful of additional facts, many of them\n24 irrelevant, and none of which meets Plaintiffs\u2019 burden of pleading particularized facts\n25 supporting their allegations. This case should thus now be dismissed with prejudice.\n26 Plaintiffs\u2014alleged Marathon shareholders suing derivatively\u2014purport to stand in\n27 the Company\u2019s shoes and sue certain of its current and former directors and officers on the\n28 Company\u2019s behalf. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants violated Nevada state law and Section\n 1\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 3 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by failing to prevent Marathon from making\n\n 2 two errors related to esoteric aspects of cryptocurrency accounting that caused the\n\n 3 Company to restate its financials on February 28, 2023. This was the basis of the FAC,\n\n 4 and the SAC simply repeats verbatim nearly every allegation in the FAC, but adds a\n\n 5 hodgepodge of conclusory and otherwise inadequate allegations that have been routinely\n\n 6 rejected by courts as insufficient to plead demand futility and to state a claim for relief. It\n\n 7 should be dismissed on both grounds.\n\n 8 First, the SAC comes nowhere near meeting the exacting standard for pleading\n\n 9 demand futility under Rule 23.1 and Nevada law. Marathon\u2019s Board had seven directors\n\n10 when the SAC was filed. Plaintiffs allege that demand would have been futile because four\n\n11 of the seven (the \u201cDemand Defendants\u201d)\u2014the minimum number needed\u2014purportedly\n\n12 could not impartially consider a pre-suit demand because they either (i) received a material\n\n13 personal benefit from the alleged misconduct, (ii) faced a substantial likelihood of liability\n\n14 on the claims in this action, or (iii) lacked independence from someone conflicted under\n\n15 prongs (i) and (ii). The SAC fails to satisfy Plaintiffs\u2019 heavy pleading burden.\n\n16 The SAC adds no new facts about the Demand Defendants\u2019 compensation, but\n\n17 instead purports to show that it constituted a \u201cmaterial personal benefit\u201d because it was\n\n18 higher than the \u201caverage\u201d compensation for directors at United States companies, and for\n\n19 directors at three of Marathon\u2019s \u201ccompetitors.\u201d This allegation fails out of the gate because\n\n20 Plaintiffs once again identify no link\u2014as they must\u2014between the Demand Directors\u2019\n\n21 compensation and the Company\u2019s alleged accounting errors. The comparison also fails\n\n22 because the SAC provides no context whatsoever about the three competitors, such as the\n\n23 size, operations, and performance of the companies, and the qualifications, experience, and\n\n24 responsibilities of the directors at those companies. Even if Plaintiffs could link the\n\n25 directors\u2019 compensation to the accounting judgments they challenge (and they cannot), the\n\n26 mere fact that Marathon\u2019s directors earned more than directors at three other companies,\n\n27 selected through no apparent criteria, cannot excuse demand.\n\n28 Plaintiffs also fail to adequately allege that any Demand Defendant faces a\n\n 2\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 4 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 substantial likelihood of liability for the claims in the SAC, each of which, under Nevada\n\n 2 law, requires facts demonstrating \u201cintentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of\n\n 3 law.\u201d The SAC contains no such facts. Instead, it repeats nearly every failed allegation\n\n 4 from the FAC, and adds a section identifying supposed \u201cred flags\u201d that should have alerted\n\n 5 Defendants to the purported misconduct: five cherry-picked publications from 2021 and\n\n 6 2022 discussing differing views about cryptocurrency accounting methods. But there are\n\n 7 no allegations that the Demand Directors discussed this technical accounting literature in\n\n 8 any Board meeting or that the publications reflected any sort of industry consensus. There\n\n 9 is not one particularized allegation anywhere in the SAC describing any \u201cred flag\u201d that any\n\n10 Demand Defendant ever learned, read, or discussed concerning cryptocurrency accounting.\n\n11 Plaintiffs\u2019 reliance on five publications in a two-year period\u2014each of which reflects\n\n12 uncertainty and debate over cryptocurrency accounting methods\u2014is improper hindsight\n\n13 pleading and falls far short of demonstrating that any Demand Defendant engaged in\n\n14 \u201cintentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law.\u201d The Section 14(a) claim is\n\n15 deficient for the additional reason that there is no causal link between the corporate actions\n\n16 solicited in the challenged proxy statements and the alleged accounting errors.\n\n17 Second, the SAC also should be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6). For substantially\n\n18 the same reasons it fails to plead a substantial likelihood of liability, including its utter\n\n19 failure to plead facts supporting any Defendant\u2019s knowledge or intent, the SAC fails to\n\n20 state a claim against any Defendant for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment,\n\n21 corporate waste, or under Section 14(a).\n\n22 STATEMENT OF FACTS\n\n23 A. The Parties and Marathon\u2019s Board\n\n24 Nominal Defendant Marathon is a bitcoin digital mining company incorporated in\n\n25 Nevada. \u00b6\u00b6 2, 37. 1 When the SAC was filed, Marathon\u2019s Board had seven directors. \u00b6\n\n26\n 1\n Cites to \u201c\u00b6\u201d are to paragraphs of the SAC. Cites to \u201cTr.\u201d are to the February 20, 2025\n27 hearing transcript. ECF No. 67. Cites to \u201cEx.\u201d are to exhibits to the Stein Declaration,\n which this court can consider because they are either documents incorporated into the\n28\n\n 3\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 5 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 265. Only four of those directors\u2014the Demand Defendants (Antoun, Leupp, Mellinger,\n\n 2 and Thiel)\u2014are Defendants in this action. Id. Three of the Demand Defendants\u2014Antoun,\n\n 3 Leupp, and Mellinger\u2014are outside, non-employee, non-management directors. See Ex. A\n\n 4 at 7-8, 13; \u00b6\u00b6 51-53, 60-62, 66-68. Antoun and Leupp joined the Board on May 20, 2021,\n\n 5 and Mellinger joined ten months later, on March 31, 2022. Id. Thiel has served as the\n\n 6 chairman of the Board and Marathon\u2019s CEO since 2021. \u00b6 38. Marathon\u2019s other three\n\n 7 directors are non-parties and Plaintiffs do not dispute that the three non-party directors\n\n 8 could impartially consider a litigation demand. See \u00b6\u00b6 264-304. The remaining six\n\n 9 Defendants are former Marathon directors or officers. \u00b6\u00b6 41, 45, 48, 54, 57, 63.\n\n10 NRS \u00a7 78.138(7) and Marathon\u2019s charter exculpate Marathon\u2019s directors and\n\n11 officers for personal liability to the Company for \u201cany damages as a result of any act or\n\n12 failure to act in his or her capacity as a director or officer\u201d except for breaches of fiduciary\n\n13 duty involving \u201cintentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law.\u201d Ex. B at 6.\n\n14 B. The Alleged Wrongdoing\n\n15 Plaintiffs allege that Marathon\u2019s public filings between May 10, 2021 and February\n\n16 23, 2023 (the \u201cRelevant Period\u201d) contained \u201cfalse and misleading statements regarding the\n\n17 Company\u2019s business, operations, and prospects.\u201d \u00b6 24. Plaintiffs allege that \u201cthe truth\u201d\n\n18 \u201cemerge[d]\u201d on February 28, 2023, when Marathon disclosed that, based on SEC comment\n\n19 letters and consultation with Marathon\u2019s independent auditor, it concluded that several\n\n20 previously issued annual and quarterly financial statements for 2021 and 2022 should \u201cno\n\n21 longer be relied upon\u201d \u201cdue to certain accounting errors,\u201d and that Marathon intended to\n\n22 file corrected financial statements. \u00b6\u00b6 18, 210.\n\n23 Marathon explained that two novel, complex accounting procedures involving\n\n24 digital assets necessitated restatement. First, Marathon disclosed that it had \u201crecently\n\n25\n\n26\n complaint by reference or of which the court can take judicial notice. See Ferris v. Wynn\n27 Resorts Ltd., 462 F. Supp. 3d 1101, 1117 (D. Nev. 2020) (taking judicial notice of \u201cSEC\n filings, matters of public record, and news articles\u201d). All emphases are added and internal\n28 quotation marks, alterations, and citations are omitted unless noted.\n\n\n 4\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 6 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 determined that its method of calculated impairment\u201d for its bitcoin holdings \u201cwas not in\n\n 2 compliance with the ASC 350-30.\u201d Id. Specifically, Marathon had been calculating the\n\n 3 \u201cfair value\u201d of its bitcoin by referring to its trading price on a major crypto exchange at a\n\n 4 standard cutoff time each day, rather than by referring to the intraday low price. Id.\n\n 5 Second, Marathon disclosed that it had \u201crecently determined\u201d that its assessment of\n\n 6 whether the company was an agent or principal while operating MaraPool\u2014a bitcoin\n\n 7 mining pool that included certain unrelated third-party participants\u2014was incorrect. Id.\n\n 8 Specifically, Marathon had previously determined that it acted as an agent when operating\n\n 9 the pool and that the bitcoin miners themselves were principals, resulting in incorrect\n\n10 recording of revenue. Id. Plaintiffs do not allege that there were any established rules for\n\n11 either accounting procedure during the Relevant Period. Indeed, the SAC acknowledges\n\n12 that these issues were subject to different interpretations and judgments. Infra at 15.\n\n13 Plaintiffs allege proxy statements filed June 16, 2021 (the \u201c2021 Proxy\u201d) and\n\n14 September 12, 2022 (the \u201c2022 Proxy,\u201d together, the \u201cProxies\u201d), were false and misleading\n\n15 because Marathon failed to disclose that it would \u201cneed to restate several financial\n\n16 statements\u201d in the future as a result of these two accounting issues. \u00b6\u00b6 150-51, 199.\n\n17 Plaintiffs also allege that the two accounting errors revealed that Marathon had \u201cproblems\n\n18 with internal controls\u201d and that its \u201ccorporate governance\u201d was not \u201cstrong.\u201d Id.\n\n19 On August 9, 2024, Defendants moved to dismiss the FAC. ECF No. 50. On\n\n20 February 20, 2025, this Court heard oral argument and dismissed the FAC because it lacked\n\n21 the particularized allegations required to allege demand futility. Tr. 61:10-23. This Court\n\n22 held that Plaintiffs failed to make \u201cvery specific\u201d allegations that \u201cgo through defendant\n\n23 by defendant and explain why . . . there would be futility as relates to that for each\n\n24 defendant,\u201d though even doing so \u201cmay still not be enough given the arguments\u201d raised by\n\n25 Defendants. Tr. 62:19-25; 63:1-5. This Court permitted Plaintiffs \u201cone additional\n\n26 opportunity to amend,\u201d and noted that Defendants were \u201cfree to raise all of the arguments\u201d\n\n27 they raised previously when moving to dismiss the forthcoming SAC. Tr. 63:15.\n\n28 The SAC repeats verbatim nearly every allegation in the inadequate FAC. See\n\n 5\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 7 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 generally Ex. C. It also adds two categories of allegations. First, the SAC adds two new\n\n 2 paragraphs providing figures for the \u201caverage\u201d and \u201cmedian\u201d compensation for directors\n\n 3 of United States companies, and compensation information for directors at three of\n\n 4 Marathon\u2019s competitors. \u00b6\u00b6 270-271. Plaintiffs do not, however, explain why only these\n\n 5 three companies are appropriate comparisons or how they were selected, and ignore\n\n 6 competitors that provided their directors with compensation similar to or greater than\n\n 7 Marathon. Second, the SAC adds a section purporting to allege that Defendants \u201cwere\n\n 8 aware of Marathon\u2019s accounting and internal control problems, through the existence of\n\n 9 red flags that were readily before them.\u201d \u00b6\u00b6 229-254. Plaintiffs quote from a smattering\n\n10 of technical accounting publications from the Relevant Period about cryptocurrency\n\n11 accounting. \u00b6\u00b6 233-37. But Plaintiffs do not allege that these articles were discussed by\n\n12 the Board or that any Defendant ever read them or was even aware of them. Plaintiffs do\n\n13 not explain how they selected these publications, nor allege that the publications\n\n14 represented an industry consensus or controlling view about the accounting judgments at\n\n15 issue. Plaintiffs\u2019 other additions to the SAC are mainly of allegations that are cumulative\n\n16 of their prior allegations, including several instances of expanded block quotations. Ex. C\n\n17 at 3-7, 46-48, 86, 92-101, 103-104, 115-123, 135-130.\n\n18 The SAC asserts state law claims for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment,\n\n19 and waste, and alleges that statements in the Proxies were false and misleading in violation\n\n20 of Section 14(a). The SAC abandons Plaintiffs\u2019 claim under Section 10(b) of the Exchange\n\n21 Act. Id. at 138. Plaintiffs did not make a pre-suit demand on the Marathon Board. \u00b6 265.\n\n22 They assert instead that demand is excused because a majority of the Board cannot\n\n23 impartially consider whether to assert their claims on Marathon\u2019s behalf. Id.\n\n24 ARGUMENT\n\n25 I. THE SAC FAILS TO PLEAD DEMAND FUTILITY\n\n26 A. Plaintiffs\u2019 Burden to Plead Demand Futility Is Exacting\n\n27 Plaintiffs\u2019 burden to establish demand futility is governed by Nevada law because\n\n28 Marathon is incorporated in Nevada. \u00b6 2; La. Mun. Police Emps.\u2019 Ret. Sys. v. Wynn, 829\n\n 6\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 8 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 F.3d 1048, 1058 (9th Cir. 2016). \u201cNevada, in turn, looks to Delaware law on shareholder\n\n 2 demand futility.\u201d Id.; Shoen v. SAC Holding Corp., 137 P.3d 1171, 1184 (Nev. 2006).\n\n 3 A cardinal precept of Nevada and Delaware law is that the \u201cboard of directors\u201d\u2014\n\n 4 not shareholders\u2014\u201chas full control over the affairs of the corporation.\u201d Shoen, 137 P.3d\n\n 5 at 1178; N.R.S. \u00a7 78.120. Accordingly, the board \u201chas sole authority\u201d to decide whether\n\n 6 to pursue lawsuits on behalf of the company. White v. Panic, 783 A.2d 543, 550 (Del.\n\n 7 2001). A plaintiff who fails to make a pre-suit demand bears the heavy burden of pleading\n\n 8 \u201cwith particularity\u201d facts showing that pre-suit demand would have been futile. Fed. R.\n\n 9 Civ. P. 23.1(b)(3). \u201cThis heightened pleading burden is . . . more onerous than that required\n\n10 to withstand a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.\u201d Jacobi v. Ergen, 2016 WL 1089232, at *3 (D. Nev.\n\n11 Mar. 17, 2016). Stockholder plaintiffs thus may not usurp the board\u2019s authority absent\n\n12 strict compliance with Rule 23.1 and Nevada substantive law.\n\n13 In 2021, the Delaware Supreme Court established a three-part \u201cuniversal test\u201d for\n\n14 assessing demand futility. See United Food & Com. Workers Union v. Zuckerberg, 262\n\n15 A.3d 1034, 1058 (Del. 2021). The court clarified that the test is \u201cconsistent with and\n\n16 enhances\u201d the standards articulated under the court\u2019s prior precedents and their progeny,\n\n17 which expressly \u201cremain good law.\u201d Id. at 1059. Accordingly, the Zuckerberg standard is\n\n18 consistent with the Delaware law standards for assessing whether a complaint pleads\n\n19 demand futility that have been adopted by the Nevada Supreme Court. Parametric Sound\n\n20 Corp. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. in & for Cnty. of Clark, 133 Nev. 417, 424, (2017)\n\n21 (\u201c[B]ecause we have relied on the Delaware court\u2019s corporate law in the past, we turn to\n\n22 the development of Delaware law in this area since\u201d previous decision). Under\n\n23 Zuckerberg, courts must consider on a \u201cdirector-by-director\u201d basis whether each director\n\n24 on the board: (i) \u201creceived a material personal benefit from the alleged misconduct that is\n\n25 the subject of the litigation demand\u201d; (ii) \u201cfaces a substantial likelihood of [personal]\n\n26 liability on any of the claims that would be the subject of the litigation demand\u201d; or (iii)\n\n27 \u201clacks independence from someone who\u201d satisfies one of the first two prongs. Zuckerberg,\n\n28 262 A.3d at 1059. Unless the answer to any of these three questions is \u201cyes\u201d for a majority\n\n 7\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 9 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 of the directors on an odd-numbered board\u2014here, four out of the seven directors\u2014demand\n\n 2 is not excused. Id.\n\n 3 Under Nevada law, directors are further entitled to a presumption that they were\n\n 4 faithful to their fiduciary duties. N.R.S. \u00a7 78.138(3). Plaintiffs must plead \u201cparticularized\n\n 5 factual statements\u201d that create a reasonable doubt that a majority of the Board \u201ccould have\n\n 6 properly exercised its independent and disinterested business judgment in responding to a\n\n 7 demand\u201d to overcome this presumption. Brehm v. Eisner, 746 A.2d 244, 254 (Del. 2000);\n\n 8 Rales v. Blasband, 634 A.2d 927, 934 (Del. 1993).\n\n 9 Because Marathon\u2019s Board had seven directors when the SAC was filed, and three\n\n10 are non-parties, the failure to make a pre-suit demand is not excused unless all four Demand\n\n11 Defendants are conflicted under Zuckerberg. If Plaintiffs fail to satisfy the Zuckerberg test\n\n12 for even one Demand Defendant, demand is not futile. Plaintiffs\u2019 conclusory and otherwise\n\n13 inadequate allegations are insufficient to satisfy their heavy pleading burden.\n\n14 B. Plaintiffs Do Not Adequately Plead That Any Of The Four Demand\n Defendants Received A Material Personal Benefit\n15\n\n16 In the FAC, Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants\u2019 \u201clucrative compensation\u201d during the\n\n17 Relevant Period, particularly restricted stock unit grants, constituted \u201cmaterial personal\n\n18 benefits\u201d such that demand would be futile. FAC \u00b6\u00b6 141, 248-256. The Court correctly\n\n19 rejected this argument (Tr. 61), consistent with the well-established principle that\n\n20 \u201callegations that defendants are paid for their services as directors do not excuse demand.\u201d\n\n21 La. Mun. Police Emps. Ret. Sys. v. Blankfein, 2009 WL 1422868, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. May 19,\n\n22 2009); Ryan v. Gursahaney, 2015 WL 1915911, at *8 (Del. Ch. Apr. 28, 2015)\n\n23 (\u201c[O]rdinary director compensation alone is not enough to show demand futility\u201d), aff\u2019d,\n\n24 128 A.3d 991 (Del. 2015).\n\n25 The SAC pleads precisely the same facts about Defendants\u2019 ordinary compensation\n\n26 that the Court rejected in the FAC. But Plaintiffs now advance a new theory: that demand\n\n27 is futile as to the Demand Defendants because they supposedly received \u201cfar more than\n\n28 what an average director receives in additional pay at comparable companies.\u201d \u00b6 269. But\n\n 8\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 10 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 these new allegations fail to cure the fundamental flaw in the FAC because they do not\n\n 2 show that the Demand Defendants\u2019 compensation constitutes a benefit \u201cfrom the alleged\n\n 3 misconduct that is the subject of the litigation demand.\u201d Zuckerberg, 262 A.3d at 1058.\n\n 4 Plaintiffs rehash their confusing theory that Marathon\u2019s directors received \u201cstock awards\n\n 5 provided under an incentive plan solicited and approved by means of a false and misleading\n\n 6 proxy statement\u201d\u2014namely, the 2021 Proxy. \u00b6 269. Plaintiffs offered a full-throated\n\n 7 defense of this theory during oral argument, see Tr. 41:1-4; 42:24-43:1-7, and the Court\n\n 8 rejected it. Tr. 58:2-59:23. Nothing has changed. The alleged misstatements in the 2021\n\n 9 Proxy concerned misstated revenues based on Marathon\u2019s accounting judgments and\n\n10 Marathon\u2019s representation that it had \u201cstrong\u201d corporate governance; none concerned the\n\n11 incentive plan. \u00b6\u00b6 145, 150. Plaintiffs also mischaracterize the facts; the 2021 Proxy did\n\n12 not \u201csolicit\u201d an incentive plan, but instead only an amendment to increase the shares\n\n13 available in a preexisting incentive plan. \u00b6\u00b6 147, 152. There is simply no connection\n\n14 between this amendment and the alleged misstatements. Plaintiffs principally rely on In re\n\n15 Ebix, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, 2014 WL 3696655 (Del. Ch. July 24, 2014), but that\n\n16 case highlights that their theory is defective. In Ebix, plaintiffs alleged that a proxy made\n\n17 false statements about an incentive plan, and that the director defendants\u2019 acceptance of\n\n18 compensation awards under that plan constituted a breach of fiduciary duty. Id. at *22-23,\n\n19 25. There are no comparable allegations here.\n\n20 Plaintiffs\u2019 focus on stock awards is misguided for the additional reason that, \u201c[a]s\n\n21 many courts have suggested, an incentive-based compensation plan . . . does not guarantee\n\n22 an award, and thus provides no benefit\u201d; it merely \u201ccreates the possibility of the receipt of\n\n23 a material personal benefit at some later time.\u201d Gera v. Palihapitiya, 2024 WL 3818602,\n\n24 at *8 (D. Ariz. Aug. 14, 2024). Courts routinely reject allegations based on \u201cthe size of the\n\n25 stock awards eventually awarded to the Director Defendants\u201d where, as here, the complaint\n\n26 offers no analysis of each \u201cdirector\u2019s economic circumstances, or personal wealth.\u201d Id.;\n\n27 see Israni v. Bittman, 473 F. App\u2019x 548, 551 (9th Cir. 2012).\n\n28 And, critically, even if Plaintiffs could establish a connection between the\n\n 9\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 11 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 amendment to the incentive plan and the alleged misstatements in the 2021 Proxy, it could\n\n 2 not satisfy demand futility for Mellinger\u2014a necessary Demand Defendant\u2014because he\n\n 3 was not on Marathon\u2019s Board in 2021 and did not solicit the 2021 Proxy Statement. \u00b6 66.\n\n 4 Plaintiffs do not allege that the 2022 Proxy Statement concerned Marathon\u2019s incentive plan\n\n 5 or director compensation in any way.\n\n 6 Plaintiffs\u2019 \u201ccomparison\u201d theory fails for additional reasons. The SAC alleges that\n\n 7 Marathon\u2019s directors earned more than the \u201caverage salary for a director\u201d in the United\n\n 8 States and the \u201cmedian compensation provided in the form of equity\u201d for \u201cmid-cap\n\n 9 companies.\u201d \u00b6 270. The Ninth Circuit rejected similar allegations in Israni, where it held\n\n10 that demand futility cannot be satisfied under Nevada law by alleging that defendants were\n\n11 paid \u201chigher than the average director compensation paid at nineteen of the top twenty\n\n12 Fortune 500 companies.\u201d 473 F. App\u2019x at 551; Solak on behalf of Ring Energy, Inc. v.\n\n13 Rochford, 2020 WL 1865982, at *4 (D. Nev. Apr. 14, 2020) (\u201cPlaintiff compares\n\n14 Defendants\u2019 compensation to that of directors of other microcap companies, but that alone\n\n15 does not show that the other directors do comparable work in the same industry.\u201d). Director\n\n16 compensation allegations cannot defeat the presumption of disinterest unless they are \u201cso\n\n17 lavish that a mechanical application of the presumption would be totally at variance with\n\n18 reality.\u201d Israni, 473 F. App\u2019x at 551. That is not the case here, where the Court already\n\n19 rejected arguments about the size of defendants\u2019 compensation in the FAC. Indeed, no\n\n20 court has ever \u201cfound a director\u2019s fee to be something other than \u2018usual and customary\u2019\n\n21 based solely on the size of the fee.\u201d Fosbre v. Matthews, 2010 WL 2696615, at *4-5 (D.\n\n22 Nev. July 2, 2010), aff\u2019d, 473 F. App\u2019x 548 (9th Cir. 2012).\n\n23 Plaintiffs also allege that Marathon\u2019s directors earned more than directors at three\n\n24 \u201csimilar companies\u201d between 2021 and 2023. \u00b6 271. Plaintiffs appear to have plucked\n\n25 three \u201ccompetitors\u201d out of more than a dozen listed in Marathon\u2019s 2022 10-K, but provide\n\n26 no explanation for why they cherry-picked these three companies. Ex. D at 11. The SAC\n\n27 ignores other Marathon competitors in the same list that provided their directors with\n\n28 ordinary compensation similar to or greater than Marathon. See, e.g., Ex. E at 23 (Riot\n\n 10\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 12 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 Platforms: $100,000 salary and $1,012,267 in stock awards); Ex. F at 156 (Core Scientific:\n\n 2 compensation between $400,000-664,000). Moreover, comparison allegations require\n\n 3 plaintiffs to \u201ccompare the responsibility of [defendant] directors to the responsibilities of\n\n 4 directors at the referenced . . . companies.\u201d Israni, 473 F. App\u2019x at 551. Plaintiffs utterly\n\n 5 fail in this respect because the SAC includes no allegations about the size, operations, or\n\n 6 financial performance of these three companies, nor about their directors\u2019 qualifications,\n\n 7 experience, or responsibilities. At most, Plaintiffs have alleged that the compensation of\n\n 8 Marathon\u2019s directors exceeded three other companies by a few hundred thousand dollars\n\n 9 during certain years in the Relevant Period. These sparse allegations do not plead the\n\n10 Demand Defendants received compensation \u201cso lavish that a mechanical application of the\n\n11 presumption [of director disinterest] would be totally at variance with reality.\u201d Id. at 548.\n\n12 C. Plaintiffs Do Not Adequately Plead That Any Of The Four Demand\n Defendants Faces A Substantial Likelihood Of Personal Liability\n13\n\n14 To plead demand futility under the second Zuckerberg prong, Plaintiffs must allege\n\n15 with particularity that a majority of directors face \u201ca \u2018substantial likelihood\u2019 of personal\n\n16 liability\u201d \u201con a claim-by-claim basis.\u201d Taylor v. Kissner, 893 F. Supp. 2d 659, 666 (D.\n\n17 Del. 2012). Here, Plaintiffs assert that the four Demand Defendants face a substantial\n\n18 likelihood of personal liability for allegedly (i) breaching their fiduciary duties; (ii) unjustly\n\n19 enriching themselves at Marathon\u2019s expense; (iii) committing corporate waste; and (iv)\n\n20 issuing the purportedly false or misleading Proxies. These allegations fail.\n\n21 1. No Substantial Likelihood of Personal Liability for Breach of\n Fiduciary Duty\n22\n\n23 Plaintiffs allege that Defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Marathon by (i)\n\n24 failing to ensure Marathon had adequate internal controls (\u00b6 321) and (ii) making or\n\n25 \u201ccausing the Company to make\u201d false statements (\u00b6\u00b6 318-19)\u2014in both instances pointing\n\n26 to Defendants\u2019 purported failure to prevent the two accounting errors addressed in the\n\n27 restatement. Under Nevada law, this claim requires Plaintiffs to plead facts showing that\n\n28 Defendants engaged in \u201cintentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law,\u201d\n\n 11\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 13 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 supra at 4, which requires \u201cknowledge of wrongfulness.\u201d In re ZAGG Inc. S\u2019holder Deriv.\n\n 2 Action, 826 F.3d 1222, 1232-33 (10th Cir. 2016). Plaintiffs plead no such facts.\n\n 3 a. Failure to Adequately Allege Lack of Oversight\n\n 4 The main theory of the SAC is that Defendants breached their fiduciary duty of\n\n 5 loyalty by failing to maintain effective controls, as demonstrated by Defendants\u2019 purported\n\n 6 disregard of red flags about Marathon\u2019s accounting issues. Under Delaware law, this type\n\n 7 of claim is called a Caremark claim, and it \u201cis possibly the most difficult theory [to plead\n\n 8 and prove] in corporation law.\u201d In re Caremark Int\u2019l Inc. Deriv. Litig., 698 A.2d 959, 967\n\n 9 (Del. Ch. 1996). To state a Caremark claim, a plaintiff must allege with particularity that\n\n10 the directors (i) \u201cutterly failed to implement any reporting or information system or\n\n11 controls\u201d; or (ii) \u201cconsciously failed to monitor or oversee\u201d such a system \u201cthus disabling\n\n12 themselves from being informed of risks or problems requiring their attention.\u201d Stone v.\n\n13 Ritter, 911 A.2d 362, 370 (Del. 2006). Under either scenario, \u201cliability requires a showing\n\n14 that the directors knew that they were not discharging their fiduciary obligations.\u201d Id.\n\n15 Failure to plead lack of controls. The SAC lacks particularized allegations that\n\n16 any Demand Defendant utterly failed to implement a compliance system. To the contrary,\n\n17 Plaintiffs concede that the Board had an Audit Committee, \u00b6\u00b6 97-98, a Code of Ethics, \u00b6\u00b6\n\n18 85-92, and an Insider Trading Policy, \u00b6\u00b6 93-96, all of which are inconsistent with a failure\n\n19 to implement controls. See TVI Corp. v. Gallagher, C.A. No. 7798, 2013 WL 5809271, at\n\n20 *15\u201316 (Del. Ch. Oct. 28, 2013) (plaintiffs failed to state a Caremark claim where they did\n\n21 not plead \u201cspecific facts to support an inference that Defendant directors utterly failed to\n\n22 implement any reporting or information system or controls\u201d and \u201cacknowledge[d] that the\n\n23 Board maintained an audit committee\u201d).\n\n24 Failure to plead red flags. Plaintiffs have also failed to \u201cplead particularized facts\n\n25 that the board knew of evidence of corporate misconduct\u2014the proverbial \u2018red flag\u2019\u2014yet\n\n26 acted in bad faith by consciously disregarding its duty to address that misconduct.\u201d\n\n27 Horman v. Abney, 2017 WL 242571, at *10, *12 (Del. Ch. Jan. 19, 2017); In re AgFeed\n\n28 USA, LLC, 558 B.R. 116, 127 (Bankr. D. Del. 2016) (applying Nevada law in dismissing\n\n 12\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 14 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 Caremark claim where complaint did not allege that red flags were \u201cconsciously\n\n 2 disregarded\u201d or that directors \u201cdisabled [themselves] from being informed of risks or\n\n 3 problems requiring [their] attention.\u201d) The FAC raised this theory and the Court rejected\n\n 4 it because Plaintiffs failed to plead particularized facts about Defendants\u2019 knowledge with\n\n 5 the requisite specificity. Tr. 61-63. The SAC does not cure this defect because it alleges\n\n 6 nothing about what the Demand Defendants knew or when. The SAC repeats, verbatim,\n\n 7 nearly every allegation of Defendants\u2019 mental state that the Court previously rejected. See,\n\n 8 e.g., Ex. C at 131-32 (D&O Insurance); 116 (Thiel as defendant); 99 (Marcum article).\n\n 9 Because those precise allegations were previously briefed and rejected, and because the\n\n10 SAC offers no reason for the Court to reconsider them, this motion does not address them.\n\n11 The main addition to the SAC is a new section titled \u201cThe Individual Defendants\u2019\n\n12 Knowledge and Conscious Disregard of Red Flags.\u201d See \u00b6\u00b6 229-254. But there is not one\n\n13 fact in this new section, or anywhere in the 337-paragraph SAC, describing what any\n\n14 Defendant, let alone any Demand Defendant, knew, learned, or discussed at Board\n\n15 meetings or otherwise. Instead, the SAC purports to identify \u201cred flags,\u201d particularly five\n\n16 cherry-picked and highly technical accounting articles offering differing views about crypto\n\n17 accounting methodology, and asks this Court to infer that the Demand Defendants \u201cwould\n\n18 have been aware\u201d of these \u201cred flags that were readily before them\u201d because they were\n\n19 Board members. E.g., \u00b6\u00b6 14, 231-37, 254. These new allegations cannot satisfy the\n\n20 exacting Caremark standard or show that any Demand Defendant engaged in \u201cintentional\n\n21 misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law.\u201d\n\n22 Plaintiffs \u201cred flag\u201d allegations fall into five categories, each of which is flawed:\n\n23 First, Plaintiffs point to five publications concerning digital asset accounting\n\n24 between June 2021 and December 2022, and allege that their mere existence supports an\n\n25 inference that Defendants knew Marathon\u2019s bitcoin impairment accounting was improper.\n\n26 \u00b6\u00b6 233-37. But Plaintiffs do not allege that any Defendant, let alone any Demand\n\n27 Defendant, ever reviewed, or was even aware of, this esoteric accounting literature, or that\n\n28 it was \u201cwaved in [Defendants\u2019] face[s].\u201d In re Facebook, Inc. S\u2019holder Derivative Litig.,\n\n 13\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 15 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 367 F. Supp. 3d 1108, 1125 (N.D. Cal. 2019). Nor do Plaintiffs plead any facts suggesting\n\n 2 these five publications over an 18-month period were authoritative, widely discussed, or\n\n 3 reflective of industry consensus. The existence of these articles, without more, cannot\n\n 4 establish that the Demand Defendants knowingly or intentionally approved false\n\n 5 statements in the Proxies. See Israni, 473 F. App\u2019x at 551 (applying Nevada law and\n\n 6 affirming dismissal of Caremark claim where \u201cthe complaint failed to plead facts regarding\n\n 7 what information the committee members saw and failed to act on\u201d); In re Bidz.com, Inc.\n\n 8 Derivative Litig., 773 F. Supp. 2d 844, 857 (C.D. Cal. 2011) (\u201cNotably absent from the\n\n 9 Amended Complaint, however, is any allegation\u2014let alone a particularized allegation\u2014\n\n10 that [directors] ever saw or knew about the existence of\u201d market reports that supposedly\n\n11 constituted \u201cred flags\u201d); In re Citigroup Inc. S\u2019holder Derivative Litig., 964 A.2d 106, 134-\n\n12 35 (Del. Ch. 2009) (alleged \u201cred flags\u201d were public documents and market conditions that\n\n13 did \u201cnot support a reasonable inference that the director defendants approved or\n\n14 disseminated the financial disclosures knowingly or in bad faith\u201d); In re Intel Corp. Deriv.\n\n15 Litig., 621 F. Supp. 2d 165, 174 (D. Del. 2009) (\u201cThough Plaintiff identifies a number of\n\n16 so-called \u2018red flags,\u2019 Plaintiff fails to identify what the Directors actually knew about the\n\n17 \u2018red flags\u2019 and how they responded to them.\u201d).\n\n18 Additionally, although the SAC alleges that these five publications reflected\n\n19 \u201ccertain rules that companies were expected to . . . adhere to regarding how impairment\n\n20 was measured on intangible assets like Bitcoin\u201d (\u00b6 232), that is not what they show. One\n\n21 publication, an \u201cacademic report\u201d from December 2022, does not mention the viability of\n\n22 using a daily cutoff method for impairment, as Marathon did. \u00b6 237. Instead, it notes a\n\n23 \u201cshift\u201d towards an impairment trigger of \u201clowest price since acquisition\u201d\u2014Plaintiffs\u2019\n\n24 preferred method\u2014which represents a \u201cconservative interpretation\u201d of GAAP \u201cin the\n\n25 absence of an authoritative accounting standard.\u201d Id. Another publication, an FASB\n\n26 \u201cInvitation to Comment\u201d seeking feedback about \u201cfuture standard-setting,\u201d says nothing\n\n27 about current accounting standards. \u00b6 233. Yet another publication is a PwC guide\n\n28 recommending that \u201creporting entities should establish and consistently apply a policy for\n\n 14\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 16 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 identifying and incorporating events that may affect fair value measurement,\u201d but not\n\n 2 recommending any particular policy. \u00b6 235. In other words, the publications Plaintiffs\n\n 3 rely on show that, during the Relevant Period, there was a vigorous debate about, and no\n\n 4 authoritative accounting standard for, calculating cryptocurrency impairment. If any\n\n 5 Demand Defendant had even read these articles\u2014which is not pleaded\u2014it would not have\n\n 6 alerted them to the \u201cwrongfulness\u201d of purported accounting inaccuracies in the Proxies.\n\n 7 Second, Plaintiffs purport to identify \u201cred flags\u201d in Marathon\u2019s 2021 10-K filings.\n\n 8 Plaintiffs point first to Marathon\u2019s disclosure on March 1, 2022, that it would delay the\n\n 9 filing of its 10-K due to the Company\u2019s \u201cincrease in amount and complexity of revenues,\u201d\n\n10 \u201ctransition to large accelerated filer status,\u201d and \u201cfirst year of being audited for internal\n\n11 controls.\u201d \u00b6 240. Plaintiffs then allege that when Marathon filed its 2021 10-K nine days\n\n12 later, it disclosed that its auditor had identified a material weakness concerning its \u201cuser\n\n13 access controls\u201d to \u201censure that [certain] IT program and data changes\u201d were \u201cidentified,\n\n14 tested, authorized and implemented appropriately to validate that data produced by its\n\n15 relevant IT system(s) were complete and accurate.\u201d \u00b6 246. Plaintiffs allege that these\n\n16 issues would have \u201cindicated the need for a more robust investigation into the Company\u2019s\n\n17 accounting processes and protocols.\u201d \u00b6 244.\n\n18 This theory also fails to show bad faith or \u201cknowledge of wrongfulness.\u201d As an\n\n19 initial point, these disclosures all occurred before Mellinger joined the Board and therefore\n\n20 cannot show his knowledge, which means this theory applies to less than a majority of\n\n21 Marathon\u2019s Board. This theory is also not new; Plaintiffs cited these same disclosures in\n\n22 the FAC (Ex. C at 55-56), and the fact that Plaintiffs now quote these filings at greater\n\n23 length is no reason for the Court to reconsider them. In any event, Plaintiffs make no\n\n24 attempt to link the issues in the 2021 10-K\u2014which concerned \u201cuser access\u201d and \u201cchange\n\n25 management\u201d controls that affected the Company\u2019s IT systems and mining equipment\u2014to\n\n26 the cryptocurrency accounting judgments that supposedly made the 2022 Proxy\n\n27 misleading. Even if three Demand Defendants were aware of the former, there is no reason\n\n28 to infer they were aware of the latter\u2014or any other wholly unrelated issue at the Company.\n\n 15\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 17 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 See In re Facebook, 367 F. Supp. 3d at 1125 n.7 (\u201cred flags\u201d about user privacy were not\n\n 2 \u201c\u2018sufficiently similar\u2019 to the \u2018corporate trauma\u2019 underlying th[e] action,\u201d namely,\n\n 3 \u201cpotential unauthorized third-party access to and use of Facebook users\u2019 personal data\u201d\n\n 4 (emphasis in original)). Moreover, Plaintiffs\u2019 new allegations acknowledge that the\n\n 5 Company announced remediation steps to address these weaknesses and a commitment\n\n 6 from management to report on remediation progress to the Audit Committee. See \u00b6\u00b6 247-\n\n 7 48. This demonstrates a functioning Audit Committee, not one that ignores \u201cred flags.\u201d\n\n 8 Ash v. McCall, 2000 WL 1370341, at *15 (Del. Ch. Sept. 15, 2000) (finding no demand\n\n 9 futility where \u201cdirectors became aware of the accounting improprieties . . . and\n\n10 immediately took decisive steps to disclose and cure them\u201d).\n\n11 Third, Plaintiffs rehash the allegation that two Demand Defendants (Leupp and\n\n12 Antoun)\u2014less than half of Marathon\u2019s seven-member Board\u2014were members of the Audit\n\n13 Committee to imply that they \u201cwould have been particularly aware of the required\n\n14 accounting methods for cryptocurrency and the mounting evidence that Marathon\u2019s actual\n\n15 accounting practices were not consistent with those requirements.\u201d \u00b6 242. As discussed\n\n16 supra at 14, Plaintiffs\u2019 own allegations undermine any suggestion of \u201crequired accounting\n\n17 methods\u201d during the Relevant Period. In any event, Plaintiffs previously argued this theory\n\n18 and the Court already rejected it. Tr. 6:2-5 (it is \u201cnot enough\u201d to merely allege that a\n\n19 defendant was \u201con the audit committee\u201d). The SAC merely takes the previously pleaded\n\n20 responsibilities set out in Marathon\u2019s Audit Committee Charter, FAC \u00b6\u00b6 91, 258, and\n\n21 moves them to individual paragraphs for Leupp and Antoun. \u00b6\u00b6 242, 282, 289. Plaintiffs\n\n22 do not describe any actual Audit Committee meeting or what was discussed and do not\n\n23 show any Demand Defendant\u2019s awareness of technical crypto accounting issues, much less\n\n24 \u201cknowledge of wrongfulness\u201d or bad faith. Plaintiffs ask the Court to infer liability from\n\n25 the mere existence of an Audit Committee and description of its role, but that is \u201ccontrary\n\n26 to well-settled Delaware law.\u201d Wood v. Baum, 953 A.2d 136, 142 (Del. 2008); South v.\n\n27 Baker, 62 A.3d 1, 17 (Del. Ch. 2012) (\u201c[A]n allegation that the underlying cause of a\n\n28 corporate trauma falls within the delegated authority of a board committee does not support\n\n 16\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 18 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 an inference that the directors on that committee knew of and consciously disregarded the\n\n 2 problem\u201d). Board members are not \u201cexpected to know the minutiae of SEC regulations\u201d\n\n 3 and have \u201clawyers and accountants for that purpose.\u201d ZAGG, 826 F.3d at 1234-35.\n\n 4 Fourth, Plaintiffs allege that Demand Defendant Mellinger \u201cwould have been privy\n\n 5 to information and personnel that would have made [him] aware\u201d of the accounting issues\n\n 6 simply because he was on the Board for part of 2022. \u00b6 243. Again, Plaintiffs do not\n\n 7 describe any actual Board meeting, much less one where Mellinger \u201cwould have been\n\n 8 exposed to detailed information regarding Marathon\u2019s accounting procedures and the\n\n 9 prevailing rules with regard to proper digital asset accounting procedures.\u201d Id. These\n\n10 allegations are even more attenuated than the \u201cAudit Committee membership\u201d theory and\n\n11 cannot demonstrate demand futility. As the Ninth Circuit has explained, courts \u201ccannot\n\n12 assume that members of the Board had knowledge of the conspiracy simply because other\n\n13 individuals at [the company]\u2014even other Board members\u2014knew. Instead, Plaintiff would\n\n14 need to demonstrate a clear line of communication and knowledge between the implicated\n\n15 officers and the Board.\u201d Towers v. Iger, 912 F.3d 523, 530 (9th Cir. 2018) (rejecting\n\n16 demand futility where plaintiffs alleged that officers communicated with the Board but\n\n17 \u201cdid not allege with particularity that information regarding the conspiracy was ever\n\n18 transmitted to the Board by these or other officers\u201d) (emphasis in original).\n\n19 Fifth, Plaintiffs add vague allegations that Thiel\u2014the CEO\u2014was \u201chighly\n\n20 experienced,\u201d possessed strong \u201cpedigree,\u201d and was \u201cin a position to not only oversee, but\n\n21 to interact with the nuances of the Company\u2019s accounting and auditing apparatus.\u201d \u00b6\u00b6 229\u2013\n\n22 230. Plaintiffs also reallege that two unrelated companies\u2014Tesla and MicroStrategy\u2014\n\n23 calculated bitcoin impairment using a different method than Marathon, \u00b6 230, and therefore\n\n24 that Thiel \u201cwould have been aware\u201d of cryptocurrency accounting issues \u201cfrom discussions\n\n25 with auditors and other personnel prior to certifying Marathon\u2019s financial reports.\u201d\n\n26 \u00b6 231. Again, Plaintiffs plead no factual support: there are no descriptions of \u201cdiscussions\n\n27 with auditors and other personnel\u201d or \u201cinteract[ions]\u201d with Marathon\u2019s \u201caccounting and\n\n28 auditing apparatus.\u201d \u00b6\u00b6 231, 275. Plaintiffs rely entirely on Thiel\u2019s \u201cposition\u201d as CEO,\n\n 17\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 19 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 but that is not enough to impute \u201cknowledge of wrongfulness\u201d or bad faith. In re Accuray,\n\n 2 Inc. S'holder Derivative Litig., 757 F. Supp. 2d 919, 933 (N.D. Cal. 2010).\n\n 3 b. Failure to Adequately Allege False Statements\n\n 4 Plaintiffs scarcely try to plead a false statement claim, which requires particularized\n 5 facts showing that the Demand Directors (i) \u201cknowingly disseminat[ed] materially false\n 6 information\u201d and (ii) were \u201cdeliberately misinforming shareholders.\u201d Malone v. Brincat,\n 7 722 A.2d 5, 14 (Del. 1998). There are no allegations describing any Demand Defendant\u2019s\n 8 involvement in preparing, reviewing, or disseminating any purportedly false statements\n 9 beyond simply signing one or more SEC filings, which is insufficient as a matter of law.\n10 See Seminaris v. Landa, 662 A.2d 1350, 1354 (Del. Ch. 1995). And, as discussed supra at\n11 11-17, Plaintiffs plead no facts showing that any Defendant \u201cknew\u201d the challenged\n12 statements were false and \u201cdeliberately misinform[ed] shareholders.\u201d See Metro Commc\u2019n\n13 Corp. BVI v. Advanced Mobilecomm Techs. Inc., 854 A.2d 121, 158 n.88 (Del. Ch. 2004).\n14 2. No Substantial Likelihood of Personal Liability for Unjust\n Enrichment or Corporate Waste\n15\n\n16 The SAC alleges that the Demand Defendants\u2019 purported breaches of fiduciary duty\n17 led to their unjust enrichment by virtue of their director compensation, and, similarly, that\n18 the same breaches caused or will cause waste in the form of legal costs and \u201cexcessive\n19 compensation.\u201d \u00b6\u00b6 328, 333-334; see \u00b6\u00b6 39, 52, 61, 67. Plaintiffs are not substantially\n20 likely to succeed on either claim against the Demand Defendants because, again, they have\n21 not established any \u201cintentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law.\u201d NRS \u00a7\n22 78.138(7); supra at 11-17. The claims also fail because they are premised on the same\n23 theory as the breach of fiduciary duty claim, which the SAC fails to adequately plead. See,\n24 e.g., Frank v. Elgamal, 2014 WL 957550, at *31-32 (Del. Ch. Mar. 10, 2014) (dismissing\n25 unjust enrichment claim because it was \u201cduplicative\u201d of inadequately pleaded fiduciary\n26 duty claim). Additionally, claims for unjust enrichment and waste cannot be premised on\n27 \u201cdefendants\u2019 salaries, benefits, and unspecified bonuses.\u201d Steinberg v. Dimon, 2014 WL\n28 3512848, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. July 16, 2014) (applying Delaware law and dismissing unjust\n\n 18\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 20 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 enrichment claim); Kandell ex rel. FXCM, Inc. v. Niv, 2017 WL 4334149, at *15 (Del. Ch.\n\n 2 Sept. 29, 2017) (\u201c[A]llegations that compensation is excessive or even lavish are\n\n 3 insufficient as a matter of law to meet the standard required for a claim of waste.\u201d).\n\n 4 Plaintiffs\u2019 waste theory, premised on alleged legal liability and costs, also fails because the\n\n 5 SAC fails to plead that \u201cthe amounts [the corporation] agreed to pay were so enormous by\n\n 6 comparison to the company\u2019s potential liability that no one of sound mind would have\n\n 7 agreed\u201d to pay. Boeing Co. v. Shrontz, 1992 WL 81228, at *4 (Del. Ch. Apr. 20, 1992).\n\n 8 3. No Substantial Likelihood of Personal Liability for Section\n 14(a) Claim\n 9\n\n10 Section 14(a) prohibits false or misleading statements in proxy solicitations.\n\n11 Specifically, a plaintiff must allege: (1) that defendants made a material misrepresentation\n\n12 or omission in a proxy statement; (2) with the requisite state of mind; and (3) that the proxy\n\n13 statement was the transactional cause of harm of which plaintiff complains. In re Diamond\n\n14 Foods, Inc. Derivative Litig., 2012 WL 1945814, at *4 (N.D. Cal. May 29, 2012), aff\u2019d,\n\n15 575 F. App\u2019x 716 (9th Cir. 2014).\n\n16 Plaintiffs challenge the solicitations in Marathon\u2019s Proxies of votes to (i) elect or\n\n17 re-elect Marathon directors and the non-binding vote to ratify Marathon\u2019s independent\n\n18 auditor (both Proxies), (ii) increase the number of shares of Marathon common stock in\n\n19 Marathon\u2019s equity incentive plan (2021 Proxy), and (iii) increase the number of authorized\n\n20 shares of Marathon\u2019s stock (2022 Proxy). \u00b6\u00b6 147, 197. Plaintiffs do not allege that the\n\n21 Demand Defendants made any material misstatements or omissions about the corporate\n\n22 actions solicited by the Proxies; instead, they allege that the Proxies were otherwise\n\n23 misleading because they failed to disclose the two cryptocurrency accounting errors\n\n24 underlying this action, and because they purportedly overstated the Company\u2019s \u201cstrong\u201d\n\n25 corporate governance. \u00b6\u00b6 150, 195, 199. As a result, Plaintiffs allege, \u201cshareholders\n\n26 elected and reelected Board members who were violating their fiduciary duties, thereby\n\n27 enabling the Individual Defendants to perpetuate their misconduct.\u201d \u00b6\u00b6 152, 200, 310.\n\n28 Plaintiffs cannot show that a majority of Marathon\u2019s Board faces a substantial\n\n 19\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 21 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 likelihood of liability with respect to the 2021 Proxy because only three of Marathon\u2019s\n\n 2 seven directors were on the Board at the time it was solicited and signed it. Mellinger\u2014\n\n 3 one of the four Demand Defendants\u2014did not join the Marathon Board until March 31,\n\n 4 2022 (\u00b6 66), over nine months after the 2021 Proxy, and cannot be liable under Section\n\n 5 14(a) with respect to the 2021 Proxy. Plaintiffs also fail to plead a substantial likelihood\n\n 6 that the remaining Demand Defendants are liable under Section 14(a) for the 2021 Proxy,\n\n 7 or that any Demand Defendant is liable for the 2022 Proxy, because they fail to plead facts\n\n 8 satisfying every element of a 14(a) claim.\n\n 9 a. Plaintiffs Fail to Allege Knowledge of Wrongfulness\n\n10 Plaintiffs previously argued that \u201cnegligence is all that\u2019s required\u201d to satisfy the\n11 state of mind element of Section 14(a). Tr. 5:3-7. They are wrong. Nevada law, and\n12 Marathon\u2019s charter, exculpate directors for monetary liability to the corporation unless they\n13 engage in \u201cintentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law.\u201d Supra at 4. The\n14 Tenth Circuit considered this issue in In re ZAGG, where plaintiffs alleged that demand\n15 was excused because directors of a Nevada corporation faced a substantial likelihood of\n16 liability for violations of Section 14(a). 826 F.3d at 1232. The appellate court held that\n17 demand was not excused because the directors were \u201cprotected by\u201d Nevada\u2019s exculpation\n18 statute and plaintiffs failed to plead facts showing that \u201cthe Director Defendants knew their\n19 conduct to be wrongful.\u201d Id. at 1233. Numerous courts within this Circuit have applied\n20 similar exculpation provisions under Delaware law to Section 14(a) claims and rejected\n21 demand futility allegations where plaintiffs failed to plead particularized facts showing\n22 knowledge or intentional wrongdoing. See, e.g., In re Wells Fargo & Co. S\u2019holder\n23 Derivative Litig., 2022 WL 345066, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2022) (rejecting demand\n24 futility allegations where plaintiffs failed to plead non-exculpated misconduct and\n25 explaining: \u201cnumerous courts, in considering federal securities claims, including claims\n26 brought under section 14(a), have upheld application of exculpation clauses\u201d); City of\n27 Birmingham Relief & Ret. Sys. v. Hastings, 2019 WL 3815722, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 13,\n28 2019) (similar). As discussed supra at 11-17, the SAC pleads no facts demonstrating that\n\n 20\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 22 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 any Demand Defendant knew about the two esoteric accounting methods at issue or acted\n\n 2 with \u201cknowledge of wrongfulness.\u201d Accordingly, the Section 14(a) claims fail.\n\n 3 b. Plaintiffs Fail to Allege Causation\n\n 4 Section 14(a) requires plaintiffs to allege both transaction causation and loss\n\n 5 causation. To allege transaction causation, the plaintiff must plead that the challenged\n\n 6 \u201cproxy solicitation itself, rather than the particular defect in the solicitation materials, was\n\n 7 an essential link in the accomplishment of the transaction.\u201d Mills v. Elec. Auto-Lite Co.,\n\n 8 396 U.S. 375, 385 (1970); Desaigoudar v. Meyercord, 223 F.3d 1020, 1022 (9th Cir. 2000).\n\n 9 To allege loss causation, the plaintiff \u201cmust plead both economic loss and proximate\n\n10 causation\u201d from the challenged proxy. Kuebler v. Vectren Corp., 13 F.4th 631, 645 (7th\n\n11 Cir. 2021). This means that \u201cdamages are recoverable under Section 14(a) only when the\n\n12 votes for a specific corporate transaction requiring shareholder authorization, such as a\n\n13 corporate merger, are obtained by a false proxy statement, and that transaction was the\n\n14 direct cause of the pecuniary injury for which recovery is sought.\u201d Gen. Elec. Co. by Levit\n\n15 v. Cathcart, 980 F.2d 927, 933 (3d Cir. 1992). Plaintiffs have not satisfied this standard.\n\n16 Plaintiffs allege that the Proxies were false and misleading because Defendants\n\n17 failed to report violations of the Company\u2019s Code of Ethics, falsely stated that Marathon\n\n18 had \u201cstrong\u201d governance, and reported revenue figures that the Company later restated. \u00b6\u00b6\n\n19 150-51, 198-99. But the Proxies did not solicit votes involving any of those issues. Rather,\n\n20 the Proxies solicited shareholder votes only with respect to (i) election or reelection of\n\n21 directors, (ii) non-binding ratification of Marathon\u2019s independent auditor (both Proxies),\n\n22 (iii), increasing the shares of stock in Marathon\u2019s equity incentive plan (2021 Proxy), and\n\n23 (iv) increasing the number of authorized shares of stock (2022 Proxy). These votes did not\n\n24 \u201cdirectly authorize the loss-generating corporate action,\u201d i.e., the accounting errors\n\n25 resulting in misstated revenue, In re Paypal Holdings, Inc. S\u2019holder Derivative Litig., 2018\n\n26 WL 466527, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 18, 2018), and were not the \u201cdirect cause\u201d of Plaintiffs\u2019\n\n27 purported pecuniary injury, Gen. Elec., 980 F.2d at 933.\n\n28 Numerous courts have rejected nearly identical theories. In Edward J. Goodman\n\n 21\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 23 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 Life Income Trust v. Jabil Circuit, Inc., 594 F.3d 783 (11th Cir. 2010), plaintiffs asserted\n\n 2 a Section 14(a) claim following disclosure of \u201caccounting errors\u201d and a restatement,\n\n 3 alleging misstatements in a proxy solicitation about a compensation policy that purportedly\n\n 4 caused shareholders to approve the policy and reelect certain directors. Id. at 788-89, 796-\n\n 5 97. The court affirmed dismissal on causation grounds, holding that shareholders\u2019 damages\n\n 6 \u201cwere caused not by the policies that they approved via proxy, but by management\u2019s failure\n\n 7 to follow those policies,\u201d and \u201c[t]he adoption of a compensation scheme and reelection of\n\n 8 directors was not an essential link to the losses of which the shareholders complain; the\n\n 9 insiders\u2019 decision to violate company policies was not accomplished or endorsed by any\n\n10 proxy solicitation materials.\u201d Id. at 797. Similarly, the court in Paypal dismissed Section\n\n11 14(a) claims challenging a proxy soliciting votes to elect directors because there was no\n\n12 \u201cessential link\u201d between that vote and the alleged \u201cdeceptive practices.\u201d 2018 WL 466527,\n\n13 at *4; see Diamond Foods, 2012 WL 1945814 at *7 (dismissing Section 14(a) claim\n\n14 challenging proxy soliciting votes to reelect directors and appoint auditor without\n\n15 disclosing deferred payments because neither \u201cwas an essential link to loss-generating\n\n16 corporate action\u201d); Gen. Elec., 980 F.2d at 933 (\u201c[T]he mere fact that omissions in proxy\n\n17 materials, by permitting directors to win re-election, indirectly lead to financial loss\n\n18 through mismanagement will not create a sufficient nexus with the alleged monetary loss\u201d).\n\n19 Plaintiffs\u2019 Section 14(a) claim fails for the same reason: the votes solicited in the\n\n20 Proxies did not \u201cdirectly authorize the loss-generating corporate action,\u201d i.e., the alleged\n\n21 accounting errors that led to restatement. There is no \u201cessential link\u201d between the solicited\n\n22 corporate actions\u2014election of directors, approval of an accountant, and authorization of\n\n23 new shares\u2014and the purported accounting errors. This is \u201cprecisely the sort of claim that\n\n24 courts have repeatedly found insufficient.\u201d Gen. Elec., 980 F.2d at 933.\n\n25 c. Plaintiffs Fail to Allege Falsity\n\n26 Plaintiffs\u2019 Section 14(a) claim fails for certain challenged statements for the\n\n27 additional reason that the SAC fails to plead the statements were misleading. The\n\n28 challenged statements concerning Marathon\u2019s commitment \u201cto maintaining strong\n\n 22\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 24 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 corporate governance practices,\u201d \u00b6\u00b6 145, 150, 195, are classic examples of inactionable\n\n 2 puffery. See, e.g., In re Meta Materials Inc. Sec. Litig., 2023 WL 6385563, at *11\n\n 3 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2023). Plaintiffs also fail to identify any purported violation of\n\n 4 Marathon\u2019s Code of Ethics (\u00b6 150), nor any duty for Defendants to disclose such violations.\n\n 5 In re Teledyne Defense Contracting Derivative Litig., 849 F. Supp. 1369, 1382 (C.D. Cal.\n\n 6 1993) (dismissing a Section 14(a) claim because directors need not disclose alleged\n\n 7 wrongdoing \u201cwhen such charges have not yet been brought, let alone proven\u201d).\n\n 8 D. Plaintiffs Do Not Plead a Lack of Independence\n\n 9 Under the third Zuckerberg prong, directors lack independence if they are\n10 \u201cbeholden\u201d to an interested director or stockholder or \u201cso under their influence that their\n11 discretion would be sterilized.\u201d Rales, 634 A.2d at 936. The SAC alleges in passing that\n12 Marathon\u2019s outside directors are \u201cbeholden to each other\u201d and have \u201clongstanding business\n13 and personal relationships with each other.\u201d \u00b6 28. This conclusory allegation fails because\n14 it simply parrots the legal standard and is supported by no facts. The SAC also alleges\u2014\n15 again with no facts\u2014that Thiel is \u201cbeholden to the Company and certain Defendants on\n16 the Board who authorized his lofty salary.\u201d \u00b6 279. But \u201c[t]he blanket assertion that [Thiel]\n17 lacks independence because he is beholden to the members of the Compensation\n18 Committee is too conclusory to establish that demand would have been futile.\u201d Durgin v.\n19 Sharer, 2017 WL 2214618, at *9 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2017). And the allegation that Thiel\n20 is \u201cbeholden\u201d to Marathon shows, at most, that his \u201cinterests are aligned with the company\n21 and presumably []he is able to make decisions in the best interests of the company.\u201d In re\n22 Dow Chem. Co. Derivative Litig., 2010 WL 66769, at *8 (Del. Ch. Jan. 11, 2010).\n23 * * *\n24 Plaintiffs have thus failed to allege that at least four of the seven directors on\n25 Marathon\u2019s Board were conflicted under Zuckerberg. Demand therefore is not excused.\n26 II. THE SAC FAILS TO STATE A CLAIM UNDER FEDERAL RULE 12(b)(6)\n27 The SAC also should be dismissed because it fails to state a claim upon which relief\n28 can be granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). To survive a motion to dismiss, Plaintiffs\n\n 23\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 25 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 must plead every claim with sufficient detail to be \u201cplausible on its face.\u201d Bell Atl. Corp. v.\n\n 2 Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The Court is \u201cnot bound to accept as true a legal\n\n 3 conclusion couched as a factual allegation.\u201d Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).\n\n 4 Further, as already discussed, Nevada law, and Marathon\u2019s charter, exculpate directors for\n\n 5 monetary liability to the corporation unless they engage in \u201cintentional misconduct, fraud\n\n 6 or a knowing violation of law.\u201d Supra at 4.\n\n 7 A. Plaintiffs Fail to State Any State Law Claim\n\n 8 Plaintiffs fail to state a claim for their state law claims against all Defendants for\n\n 9 substantially the same reasons Plaintiffs fail to plead a substantial likelihood of liability for\n\n10 those claims, including their failure to plead facts demonstrating that any Defendant\n\n11 engaged in \u201cintentional misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law.\u201d See, e.g., City\n\n12 of Birmingham, 2019 WL 3815722 at *16 (dismissing state law claims \u201c[f]or the same\n\n13 reason\u201d demand was not futile).\n\n14 B. Plaintiffs Fail to State a Claim Under Section 14(a)\n\n15 \u201cSection 14(a) applies to those who \u2018solicit\u2019 or \u2018permit the use of [their] name to\n\n16 solicit\u2019 stockholder votes.\u201d Mehedi v. View, Inc., 2023 WL 3592098, at *15 (N.D. Cal.\n\n17 May 22, 2023). Plaintiffs do not allege that Gallagher, Mellinger, Ouissal, Saltzman, or\n\n18 James signed the 2021 Proxy or that their names were used in soliciting that proxy, \u00b6 144,\n\n19 nor that Gallagher, Okamoto, or Saltzman signed the 2022 Proxy or that their names were\n\n20 used in soliciting that proxy, \u00b6 194. Plaintiffs\u2019 Section 14(a) claims must be dismissed\n\n21 against Defendants who neither signed nor permitted the use of their names to solicit each\n\n22 Proxy. Plaintiffs fail to plausibly state a Section 14(a) claim against the remaining\n\n23 Defendants for the same reasons discussed supra at 11-17, namely, the failure to allege\n\n24 \u201cknowledge of wrongfulness,\u201d a causal link between the alleged accounting errors and the\n\n25 corporate actions solicited by the Proxies, or that the challenged statements were materially\n\n26 misleading. See Foote v. Mehrotra, 2023 WL 7214728, at *10 (D. Del. Nov. 2, 2023).\n\n27 CONCLUSION\n\n28 The Court should dismiss the SAC with prejudice. See Tr. 63:13-17.\n\n 24\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 26 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 Dated this 20th day of May 2025.\n\n 2 FLANGAS LAW GROUP\n 3 /s/Kimberly P. Stein\n Kimberly P. Stein\n 4\n\n 5\n\n 6\n\n 7\n\n 8\n\n 9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\n 25\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 86 Filed 05/20/25 Page 27 of 27\n\n\n\n 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n 2 I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that on May 20, 2025, that I electronically filed\n\n 3 the above and foregoing document entitled MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS\u2019\n\n 4 SECOND VERIFIED CONSOLIDATED AMENDED SHAREHOLDER\n\n 5 DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of\n\n 6 electronic filing to all CM/ECF registrants.\n\n 7\n\n 8 /s/Ronnielyn Abrera\n An employee of Flangas Law Group\n 9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\n 26\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2025-06-23T02:39:02.038890-07:00","document_number":"86","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115010942376","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Motion Dismiss","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-05-20T15:22:38.891102-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:24.023889-07:00","date_filed":"2025-05-20","time_filed":"14:34:25","entry_number":86,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-05-20.001","pacer_sequence_number":337,"description":"MOTION to Dismiss 68 Amended Complaint, by Defendants Doug Mellinger, Frederick G. Thiel, Hugh J. Gallagher, Merrick Okamoto, Simeon Salzman, Georges Antoun, Kevin Denuccio, Sarita James, Jay Leupp, Said Ouissal, Nominal Defendant Marathon Digital Holdings, INC.. Responses due by 6/3/2025. (Stein, Kimberly) (Entered: 05/20/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/426012481/","id":426012481,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/440169601/","id":440169601,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/87/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-05-20T15:22:38.290954-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-24T02:26:08.939705-07:00","sha1":"a7e507a9cb1827d8da8e773599e360d1d1ea00e6","page_count":4,"file_size":167758,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286.87.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286.87.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":" Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 87 Filed 05/20/25 Page 1 of 4\n\n\n\n 1 FLANGAS LAW GROUP\n KIMBERLY P. STEIN\n 2 Nevada Bar No. 8675\n Email: kps@fdlawlv.com\n 3 3275 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 105\n Las Vegas, NV 89146\n 4 Telephone: (702) 307-9500\n 5\n PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &\n 6 GARRISON LLP\n ANDREW J. EHRLICH (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n 7 New York Bar No. 4103909\n Email: aehrlich@paulweiss.com\n 8 DANIEL S. SINNREICH (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n 9 New York Bar No. 5192497\n Email: dsinnreich@paulweiss.com\n10 KEVIN P. MADDEN (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n New York Bar No. 5990049\n11 Email: kmadden@paulweiss.com\n 1285 Avenue of the Americas\n12 New York, NY 10019-6064\n13 Telephone: (212) 373-3000\n\n14 MATTHEW D. STACHEL (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n Delaware Bar No. 5419\n15 Email: mstachel@paulweiss.com\n 1313 North Market Street, Suite 806\n16 Wilmington, DE 19801-0032\n17 Telephone: (302) 655-4410\n\n18 Attorneys for Defendants\n\n19\n20\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n21\n DISTRICT OF NEVADA\n22\n\n23\n IN RE MARATHON DIGITAL HOLDINGS Lead Case No: 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW\n24\n DERIVATIVE LITIGATION\n25\n This Document Relates to: DECLARATION OF KIMBERLY P.\n26 ALL ACTIONS STEIN IN SUPPORT OF\n DEFENDANTS\u2019 MOTION TO DISMISS\n27\n\n28\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 87 Filed 05/20/25 Page 2 of 4\n\n\n\n 1 I, Kimberly P. Stein, declare as follows, under the penalty of perjury, pursuant to\n\n 2 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1746:\n\n 3 1. I am a resident of the State of Nevada, and partner of the firm Flangas Law\n\n 4 Group, counsel for Defendants Georges Antoun, Kevin A. DeNuccio, Hugh Gallagher,\n\n 5 Sarita James, Jay Leupp, Doug Mellinger, Merrick Okamoto, Said Ouissal, Simeon\n\n 6 Salzman, Fred Thiel, and Nominal Defendant MARA Holdings, Inc., f/k/a Marathon\n\n 7 Digital Holdings, Inc. (\u201cMarathon\u201d), in the above-captioned matter.\n\n 8 2. I respectfully submit this Declaration in support of Defendants\u2019 Motion to\n\n 9 Dismiss Plaintiffs\u2019 Second Verified Consolidated Amended Shareholder Derivative\n\n10 Complaint.\n\n11 3. Attached as Exhibit A is an excerpt of the proxy statement of Marathon,\n\n12 filed publicly with the SEC on April 30, 2025.\n\n13 4. Attached as Exhibit B is Marathon\u2019s Articles of Incorporation, filed\n\n14 publicly with the SEC on March 16, 2023 as Exhibit No. 3.1 to Marathon\u2019s fiscal year 2022\n\n15 Form 10-K.\n\n16 5. Attached as Exhibit C is a redline comparing Plaintiffs\u2019 First Amended\n\n17 Complaint (\u201cFAC), ECF No. 48, to Plaintiffs\u2019 Second Amended Complaint (\u201cSAC\u201d), ECF\n\n18 No. 68, showing the changes between the FAC and SAC.\n\n19 6. Attached as Exhibit D is an excerpt of Marathon\u2019s fiscal year 2022 Form\n\n20 10-K, filed publicly with the SEC on March 16, 2023, and cited at paragraph 212 of the\n\n21 SAC.\n\n22 7. Attached as Exhibit E is an excerpt of a proxy statement for Riot Platforms,\n\n23 Inc., filed publicly with the SEC on May 1, 2023.\n\n24 8. Attached as Exhibit F is an excerpt of the fiscal year 2023 Form 10-K for\n\n25 Core Scientific, Inc., filed publicly with the SEC on March 13, 2024.\n\n26 ///\n\n27 ///\n\n28 ///\n 1\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 87 Filed 05/20/25 Page 3 of 4\n\n\n\n 1 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America\n\n 2 that the foregoing is true and correct based upon my knowledge, information and belief.\n\n 3 Executed on: May 20, 2025\n\n 4 /s/Kimberly P. Stein\n Kimberly P. Stein\n 5\n\n 6\n\n 7\n\n 8\n\n 9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\n 2\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 87 Filed 05/20/25 Page 4 of 4\n\n\n\n 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n 2 I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that on May 20, 2025, that I electronically filed\n\n 3 the above and foregoing document entitled DECLARATION OF KIMBERLY P.\n\n 4 STEIN IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS\u2019 MOTION TO DISMISS using the\n\n 5 CM/ECF system which will send a notice of electronic filing to all CM/ECF registrants.\n\n 6\n\n 7 /s/Ronnielyn Abrera\n An employee of Flangas Law Group\n 8\n\n 9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\n 3\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2025-06-23T02:39:57.661558-07:00","document_number":"87","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115010942387","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Declaration","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/443441234/","id":443441234,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/87/1/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.397455-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.397480-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":9,"file_size":1155870,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"87","attachment_number":1,"pacer_doc_id":"115010942388","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit Ex. A - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/443441235/","id":443441235,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/87/2/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.457476-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.457499-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":9,"file_size":2808743,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"87","attachment_number":2,"pacer_doc_id":"115010942389","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit Ex. B - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/443441236/","id":443441236,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/87/3/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.476908-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.476929-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":153,"file_size":2782095,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"87","attachment_number":3,"pacer_doc_id":"115010942390","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit Ex. C - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/443441237/","id":443441237,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/87/4/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.507597-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.507621-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":3,"file_size":891956,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"87","attachment_number":4,"pacer_doc_id":"115010942391","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit Ex. D - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/443441238/","id":443441238,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/87/5/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.525826-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.525849-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":4,"file_size":922923,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"87","attachment_number":5,"pacer_doc_id":"115010942392","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit Ex. E - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint","acms_document_guid":""},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/443441239/","id":443441239,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/87/6/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.542271-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T02:39:47.542294-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":4,"file_size":923473,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"87","attachment_number":6,"pacer_doc_id":"115010942393","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":2,"description":"Exhibit Ex. F - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-05-20T15:22:38.233352-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:24.053854-07:00","date_filed":"2025-05-20","time_filed":"14:39:39","entry_number":87,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-05-20.002","pacer_sequence_number":340,"description":"DECLARATION of Kimberly P. Stein re 86 Motion to Dismiss, by Defendants Doug Mellinger, Frederick G. Thiel, Hugh J. Gallagher, Merrick Okamoto, Simeon Salzman, Georges Antoun, Kevin Denuccio, Sarita James, Jay Leupp, Said Ouissal, Nominal Defendant Marathon Digital Holdings, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex. A - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, # 2 Exhibit Ex. B - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, # 3 Exhibit Ex. C - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, # 4 Exhibit Ex. D - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, # 5 Exhibit Ex. E - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, # 6 Exhibit Ex. F - Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint)(Stein, Kimberly) (Entered: 05/20/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/421446161/","id":421446161,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/435445964/","id":435445964,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"","date_created":"2025-04-04T12:24:16.501169-07:00","date_modified":"2025-04-04T12:24:16.509635-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"QC Notice","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-04-04T12:24:16.480754-07:00","date_modified":"2025-04-04T12:24:16.480775-07:00","date_filed":"2025-04-04","time_filed":"11:34:55","entry_number":null,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-04-04.001","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/421438701/","id":421438701,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/435438442/","id":435438442,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/85/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-04-04T11:51:03.225439-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:24.013025-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"85","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-04-04T11:51:03.203414-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:23.997365-07:00","date_filed":"2025-04-04","time_filed":null,"entry_number":85,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-04-04.002","pacer_sequence_number":null,"description":"CLERK'S NOTICE Regarding Local Rule IC 2-1. Attorney Kevin P. Madden is in violation of Local Rule IC 2-1(a) and 2-1(d). You are required to register to file documents electronically in the Court's electronic filing system (CM/ECF) and the electronic service of pleadings and other papers. Please visit the PACER website www.pacer.gov to complete the registration. (no image attached) (LE) (Entered: 04/04/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/421424613/","id":421424613,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/435423996/","id":435423996,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/84/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-04-04T10:22:20.677185-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:23.973907-07:00","sha1":"47f407b520936ebfcf1a88c572adeb4cbbf61c16","page_count":6,"file_size":177022,"filepath_local":"recap/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286.84.0.pdf","filepath_ia":"https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286/gov.uscourts.nvd.163286.84.0.pdf","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":" Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 84 Filed 04/04/25 Page 1 of 6\n\n\n\n\n 1 FLANGAS LAW GROUP\n KIMBERLY P. STEIN\n 2 Nevada Bar No. 8675\n Email: kps@fdlawlv.com\n 3 3275 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 105\n Las Vegas, NV 89146\n 4 Telephone: (702) 307-9500\n 5\n PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &\n 6 GARRISON LLP\n ANDREW J. EHRLICH (Pro Hac Pending)\n 7 New York Bar No. 4103909\n Email: aehrlich@paulweiss.com\n 8 DANIEL S. SINNREICH (Pro Hac Pending)\n 9 New York Bar No. 5192497\n Email: dsinnreich@paulweiss.com\n10 KEVIN P. MADDEN (Pro Hac Pending)\n New York Bar No. 5990049\n11 Email: kmadden@paulweiss.com\n 1285 Avenue of the Americas\n12\n New York, NY 10019-6064\n13 Telephone: (212) 373-3000\n\n14 MATTHEW D. STACHEL (Pro Hac Pending)\n Delaware Bar No. 5419\n15 Email: mstachel@paulweiss.com\n 1313 North Market Street, Suite 806\n16\n Wilmington, DE 19801-0032\n17 Telephone: (302) 655-4410\n\n18 Attorneys for Defendants\n19 [Additional Counsel on Signature Block]\n20\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n21 DISTRICT OF NEVADA\n\n22 IN RE MARATHON DIGITAL HOLDINGS, Lead Case No. 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW\n INC. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION\n23\n This Document Relates to: STIPULATION REQUESTING\n24 ALL ACTIONS EXTENSION OF TIME AND\n25 [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING\n SCHEDULE\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 84 Filed 04/04/25 Page 2 of 6\n\n\n\n\n 1 WHEREAS, on August 9, 2024, Defendants Georges Antoun, Kevin A. DeNuccio, Hugh\n\n 2 Gallagher, Sarita James, Jay Leupp, Doug Mellinger, Merrick Okamoto, Said Ouissal, Simeon\n 3\n Salzman, and Frederick G. Thiel, and Nominal Defendant MARA Holdings Inc., f/k/a Marathon\n 4\n Digital Holdings, Inc., filed a Motion to Dismiss the Verified Consolidated Amended Shareholder\n 5\n Derivative Complaint (the \u201cAmended Complaint\u201d) filed by Plaintiffs Steve Hood, Gary\n 6\n Konigsberg, and Dennis Jaffee (\u201cPlaintiffs\u201d) (ECF No. 50), which was fully submitted as of\n 7\n\n 8 November 7, 2024;\n\n 9 WHEREAS, on February 20, 2025, this Court held oral argument on Defendants\u2019 Motion\n10 to Dismiss the Amended Complaint and granted the Motion to Dismiss without prejudice and\n11\n with leave to amend (ECF No. 65);\n12\n WHEREAS, on March 21, 2025, Plaintiffs filed a Second Verified Consolidated\n13\n Amended Shareholder Derivative Complaint (the \u201cSecond Amended Complaint\u201d) (ECF No. 68);\n14\n\n15 and\n\n16 WHEREAS, counsel for Defendants and Plaintiffs have conferred and agreed to a\n\n17 briefing schedule for Defendants\u2019 forthcoming Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended\n18\n Complaint;\n19\n WHEREAS, the parties request an extension of time to file Defendants\u2019 Motion to\n20\n Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs\u2019 opposition brief, and Defendants\u2019 reply\n21\n brief;\n22\n\n23 WHEREAS, pursuant to LR IA 6-1(a), this is the first stipulation for extensions of time\n\n24 to file Defendants\u2019 Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs\u2019 opposition\n\n25 brief, and Defendants\u2019 reply brief;\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n 2\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 84 Filed 04/04/25 Page 3 of 6\n\n\n\n\n 1 WHEREAS, pursuant to LR IA 6-1(a), the extensions of time requested by the parties are\n\n 2 intended to provide Defendants with the necessary time required to analyze the 114-page, 337-\n 3\n paragraph Second Amended Complaint, accommodate the recent change in Defendants\u2019 counsel,\n 4\n accommodate commitments, including long-planned vacations, of counsel, and to establish a\n 5\n briefing schedule that the parties agree is fair and reasonable;\n 6\n WHEREAS, the proposed schedule is not proposed for any improper purpose nor is it\n 7\n\n 8 intended to cause any undue delay in consideration of the Second Amended Complaint;\n\n 9 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the Court\u2019s approval, by\n10 and among undersigned counsel, that Defendants shall file their Motion to Dismiss the Second\n11\n Amended Complaint on or before May 20, 2025; Plaintiffs shall file their opposition brief on or\n12\n before July 21, 2025; and Defendants shall file their reply brief on or before August 20, 2025.\n13\n\n14\n\n15 Dated: April 2, 2025\n\n16 FLANGAS LAW GROUP\n /s/Kimberly P. Stein\n17 KIMBERLY P. STEIN\n Nevada Bar No. 8675\n18 Email: kps@fdlawlv.com\n 3275 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 105\n19\n Las Vegas, NV 89146\n20 Telephone: (702) 307-9500\n\n21 PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &\n GARRISON LLP\n22 ANDREW J. EHRLICH (Pro Hac Pending)\n New York Bar No. 4103909\n23\n Email: aehrlich@paulweiss.com\n24 DANIEL S. SINNREICH (Pro Hac Pending)\n New York Bar No. 5192497\n25 Email: dsinnreich@paulweiss.com\n KEVIN P. MADDEN (Pro Hac Pending)\n26 New York Bar No. 5990049\n27 Email: kmadden@paulweiss.com\n 1285 Avenue of the Americas\n28\n 3\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 84 Filed 04/04/25 Page 4 of 6\n\n\n\n\n 1 New York, NY 10019-6064\n Telephone: (212) 373-3000\n 2\n MATTHEW D. STACHEL (Pro Hac Pending)\n 3\n Delaware Bar No. 5419\n 4 Email: mstachel@paulweiss.com\n 1313 North Market Street, Suite 806\n 5 Wilmington, DE 19801-0032\n Telephone: (302) 655-4410\n 6\n Attorneys for Defendants\n 7\n\n 8\n Dated: April 2, 2025\n 9\n LEVERTY & ASSOCIATES LAW, CHTD.\n10 /s/Patrick R. Leverty\n Patrick. R. Leverty, Esq., NV Bar No. 8840\n11 pat@levertylaw.com\n William R. Ginn, Esq., NV Bar No. 6989\n12\n bill@levertylaw.com\n13 832 Willow Street\n Reno, NV 89502\n14 Telephone: (775) 322-6636\n15 THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C.\n16 Timothy Brown\n Saadia Hashmi (Admitted Pro Hac Vice)\n17 767 Third Avenue, Suite 2501\n New York, NY 10017\n18 Tel.: (516) 922-5427\n Fax. 516.344.6204\n19 Email: tbrown@thebrownlawfirm.net\n20 shashmi@thebrownlawfirm.net\n\n21 THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.\n Phillip Kim\n22 275 Madison Avenue 40th Floor\n New York, NY 10016\n23 Tel.: (212) 686-1060\n Email: pkim@rosenlegal.com\n24\n\n25 Attorneys for Plaintiffs\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n 4\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 84 Filed 04/04/25 Page 5 of 6\n\n\n\n\n 1 ORDER\n\n 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. Defendants\u2019 shall file their Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs\u2019 Second\n 3 Amended Complaint on or before May 20, 2025; Plaintiffs shall file their opposition brief on or\n 4\n before July 21, 2025; and Defendants shall file their reply brief on or before August 20, 2025.\n 5\n\n 6\n\n 7\n UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE\n 8\n DATED:\n 9\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n 5\n\f Case 2:23-cv-01055-RFB-BNW Document 84 Filed 04/04/25 Page 6 of 6\n\n\n\n\n 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\n 2 I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that on April 2, 2025, that I electronically filed the\n 3 above and foregoing document entitled STIPULATION REQUESTING EXTENSION OF\n 4\n TIME AND [PROPOSED] ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE using the CM/ECF system\n 5\n which will send a notice of electronic filing to all CM/ECF registrants.\n 6\n\n 7 /s/Ronnielyn Abrera\n An employee of Flangas Law Group\n 8\n\n 9\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\n25\n\n26\n\n27\n\n28\n 6\n\f","ocr_status":2,"date_upload":"2025-04-06T01:53:44.651406-07:00","document_number":"84","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115010879061","is_available":true,"is_free_on_pacer":true,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order AND Order on Stipulation","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-04-04T10:22:20.665292-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:23.964127-07:00","date_filed":"2025-04-04","time_filed":"09:37:05","entry_number":84,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-04-04.001","pacer_sequence_number":321,"description":"ORDER GRANTING 79 Stipulation; Motions due by 5/20/2025. Responses due by 7/21/2025. Replies due by 8/20/2025. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 4/4/2025. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRS) (Entered: 04/04/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/421216585/","id":421216585,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/435210680/","id":435210680,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/83/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-04-02T16:22:47.599161-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:23.929472-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"83","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115010876618","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Verified Petition for Permission to Practice Pro Hac Vice","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-04-02T16:22:47.585478-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:23.919050-07:00","date_filed":"2025-04-01","time_filed":null,"entry_number":83,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-04-01.006","pacer_sequence_number":319,"description":"ORDER granting 75 Verified Petition for Permission to Practice Pro Hac Vice as to Matthew D. Stachel for all defendants and approving Designation of Local Counsel as to Kimberly P. Stein. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 4/1/2025. Any Attorney not yet registered with the Court's e-filng system shall register on the PACER website www.pacer.gov(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CAH) (Entered: 04/02/2025)","tags":[]},{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/421211395/","id":421211395,"docket":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/dockets/67570049/","recap_documents":[{"resource_uri":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/recap-documents/435205195/","id":435205195,"tags":[],"absolute_url":"/docket/67570049/81/in-re-marathon-digital-holdings-inc-derivative-litigation/","date_created":"2025-04-02T15:21:00.761414-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:23.887558-07:00","sha1":"","page_count":null,"file_size":null,"filepath_local":null,"filepath_ia":"","ia_upload_failure_count":null,"thumbnail":null,"thumbnail_status":0,"plain_text":"","ocr_status":null,"date_upload":null,"document_number":"81","attachment_number":null,"pacer_doc_id":"115010876547","is_available":false,"is_free_on_pacer":null,"is_sealed":null,"document_type":1,"description":"Order on Verified Petition for Permission to Practice Pro Hac Vice","acms_document_guid":""}],"date_created":"2025-04-02T15:21:00.749377-07:00","date_modified":"2025-06-23T03:04:23.878630-07:00","date_filed":"2025-04-01","time_filed":null,"entry_number":81,"recap_sequence_number":"2025-04-01.004","pacer_sequence_number":315,"description":"ORDER granting 76 Verified Petition for Permission to Practice Pro Hac Vice as to Andrew J. Ehrlich for all Defendants and approving Designation of Local Counsel as to Kimberly P. Stein. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 4/1/2025. Any Attorney not yet registered with the Court's e-filng system shall register on the PACER website www.pacer.gov(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CAH) (Entered: 04/02/2025)","tags":[]}],"entries_total":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/docket-entries/?count=on&docket=67570049&page_size=40"}