Case 4:09-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 1 of 8

Similar documents
Case 4:08-cv Document 1 Filed 01/04/2008 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Case 5:17-cv Document 2 Filed in TXSD on 01/17/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LAREDO DIVISION

Case 4:12-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 06/04/12 Page 1 of 6

CAUSE NO. JANE DOE IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, JUDICIAL DISTRICT v.

The Law Offices. John S. Morgan, Esq.

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 05/25/12 Page 1 of 24 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 1:19-cv LY Document 1 Filed 04/12/19 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION V. CIVIL ACTION NO. PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

/ Court: 055

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/12/17 Page 1 of 10

Case 6:19-cv ADA-JCM Document 1 Filed 01/22/19 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION

PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION & REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE. COMES NOW, JANE DOE, Plaintiff, complaining of SEA WORLD PARKS &

Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

DC PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION COME NOW, PLAINTIFFS DEE VOIGT, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/03/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:1

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 09/02/10 Page 1 of 17 PageID #:1

UnofficialCopyOfficeofChrisDanielDistrictClerk

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

Case 5:16-cv RWS-CMC Document 1 Filed 01/29/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA THIRD DIVISION

CAUSE NO CV ANNA DRAKER IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF VS. MEDINA COUNTY, TEXAS

Case 2:17-cv JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/01/2017 Page 1 of 17

Case 5:10-cv FB Document 25 Filed 03/11/11 Page 1 of 7

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 07/20/17 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION

Case 5:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 04/13/17 Page 1 of 11

Case 3:18-cv Document 1 Filed 10/03/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

DJAS FILED. eelveo PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES. Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 02/20/18 Page 1 of 18. Case No.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Case 4:10-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 04/06/10 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 06/23/17 Page 1 of 6

Case 3:12-cv M Document 6 Filed 11/07/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID 18

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:12cv26

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

COPY 1AR ) Dept.: P52 ) 2. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 17 ) 4. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION 19 )

Case 4:16-cv Document 38 Filed in TXSD on 11/03/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY

Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 03/26/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1

PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION, RULE 194 REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURES AND RULE NOTICE

Case 4:08-cv RCC Document 1 Filed 02/25/08 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA TUCSON DIVISION

Case 3:18-cv JSC Document 1 Filed 05/02/18 Page 1 of 11

Case 1:14-cv MAC Document 22 Filed 07/15/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 123

Case 4:10-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 02/18/10 Page 1 of 9

Case 4:16-cv JEG-CFB Document 1 Filed 12/23/16 Page 1 of 13

Case 1:12-cv S-LDA Document 1 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND COMPLAINT

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI AT KANSAS CITY PETITION

D-1-GN Cause No. v. JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 01/20/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

CAUSE NUMBER PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED ORIGNAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Case: 5:15-cv SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/20/15 2 of 9. PageID #: 2

Case 4:18-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/21/18 Page 1 of 15

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/29/16 Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

Case 3:17-cv DJH Document 3 Filed 02/06/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 13

Status Conference - 05/04/2017

Case 1:14-cv Document 10 Filed in TXSD on 09/25/14 Page 1 of 11

Case 3:14-cv L Document 1 Filed 06/18/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID 1

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 02/08/17 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Case 3:12-cv JPG-DGW Document 2 Filed 12/21/12 Page 1 of 21 Page ID #3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/24/16 Page 1 of 9

Case: 4:17-cv Doc. #: 1 Filed: 07/19/17 Page: 1 of 14 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

2:15-cv CSB-DGB # 1 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS COMPLAINT

Case 6:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/31/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1

Case 1:17-cv RDB Document 1 Filed 03/06/17 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND (NORTHERN DIVISION)

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT STATE OF RHODE ISLAND COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

Case 2:12-cv SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 12/24/12 Page 1 of 17 PageID: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. Case No.

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

Case 1:19-cv PAB Document 1 Filed 01/04/19 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 08/30/16 Page 1 of 11 CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16-CV-1020

Case 2:13-cv MJP Document 19 Filed 01/29/14 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

CAUSE NO. MELANIE MENDOZA, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, VS. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHER DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

Case 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

COUNT II INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR COMBINATION OR CONSPIRACY IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE OR COMMERCE {15 U.S.C. 1, 26)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, Defendant.

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

Case 4:14-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/08/14 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:08-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/16/2008 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 05/22/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

Case 2:10-cv HGB-ALC Document 1 Filed 04/20/10 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA JANET DELUCA CIVIL ACTION

Filing # E-Filed 01/30/ :14:22 AM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. -v- Civil No. 3:12-cv-4176

Case CSS Doc 1265 Filed 03/21/17 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COU~ NOV - FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS~i.~ SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

Courthouse News Service

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION : : : : : : : : : :

Case 2:15-cv JMA-SIL Document 34 Filed 02/22/16 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 221 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 2:14-cv MJP Document 1 Filed 03/24/14 Page 1 of 13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

CAUSE NUMBER DC H. DEBORAH BROCK AND IN THE DISTRICT COURT CHRIS BROCK Plaintiffs

Transcription:

Case 4:09-cv-03305 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION COALITION FOR AN AIRLINE PASSENGERS BILL OF RIGHTS, a/k/a FLYERSRIGHTS.ORG and KATHLEEN HANNI, Individually v. CIVIL ACTION NO. (JURY) DELTA AIR LINES, INC., and METRON AVIATION, INC. PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL COMPLAINT TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COALITION FOR AN AIRLINE PASSENGERS BILL OF RIGHTS, a/k/a FLYERSRIGHTS.ORG, and KATHLEEN HANNI, Individually, (sometimes referred to as Plaintiffs ), bring this lawsuit complaining of DELTA AIR LINES, INC. and METRON AVIATION, INC. (sometimes referred to as Defendants ), and would respectfully show the following: I. PARTIES 1. Plaintiff COALITION FOR AN AIRLINE PASSENGERS BILL OF RIGHTS, a/k/a FLYERSRIGHTS.ORG is a registered non-profit organization with its principal place of business in Napa, Napa County, California. 2. Plaintiff KATHLEEN HANNI is a resident of Napa, Napa County, California.

Case 4:09-cv-03305 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 2 of 8 3. Defendant, DELTA AIR LINES, INC., is a foreign corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and with its principal office in Atlanta, Georgia. Defendant may be served with citation by serving its registered agent for service of process in Texas: Corporation Service Company, 701 Brazos Street, Suite 1050, Austin, TX 78701. 4. Defendant, METRON AVIATION, INC., is a foreign corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Virginia and with its principal office in Dulles, Virginia. Defendant does not maintain a regular place of business or a designated agent for service of process in Texas. Defendant has sufficient contacts with Texas under the Texas Long- Arm Statute, and therefore may be served with process by serving the Texas Secretary of State, 1019 Brazos Street, Austin, Texas 78701. Defendant s home office is: 45300 Catalina Court, Suite 101, Dulles, VA 20166. II. JURISDICTION 5. This Court has jurisdiction over the lawsuit under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a) because it involves a suit between citizens of different states, in which no Defendant is a citizen of the same state as Plaintiff. III. VENUE 6. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(a)(2) because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this judicial district. 2

Case 4:09-cv-03305 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 3 of 8 IV. FACTS 7. Kathleen Hanni ( Hanni ), executive director of the Coalition for an Airline Passengers Bill of Rights, a/k/a Flyersrights.org, had her privacy invaded when her AOL e-mail account and personal files on her computer were hacked, copied and then corrupted. Specifically, private e-mails and sensitive files were obtained by Delta Air Lines, Inc. ( Delta ) and subsequently used to sabotage Flyersrights efforts to pass the Airline Passenger s Bill of Rights of 2009 through Congress. 8. Hanni is the founder and executive director of Flyersrights, a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of airline passengers. First established in January 2007, Flyersrights has been aggressively advocating for Congress to pass legislation that would require airlines to recognize airline passengers rights during tarmac delays. As a result of Hanni and the organization s efforts, there are currently four airline-passenger s-rights bills before Congress. 9. California Congressman Mike Thompson and Senator Barbara Boxer currently have bills before Congress to establish the Airline Passenger Bill of Rights of 2009. 1 The bills would require airlines to provide food, water, access to restrooms, clean air and access to medical treatment during flight delays on the tarmac. 10. More importantly, the bills would require airlines to provide passengers the option to deplane if they have been delayed on the tarmac for over three hours. If the bills are passed, airlines stand to lose over $40,000,000.00 in lost revenues and millions more in accommodations for flyers deplaned during delays. 1 Exhibits A & B, H.R. 624, Airline Passenger Bill of Rights Act of 2009" & S. 213, Airline Passenger Bill of Rights Act of 2009" 3

Case 4:09-cv-03305 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 4 of 8 11. Beginning in February 2009, Hanni exchanged information with Frederick J. Foreman, PhD ( Foreman ), an MIT graduate working for Metron Aviation, Inc. ( Metron ). Foreman was hired by the FAA to analyze airline surface delays. During their correspondence, Foreman, with explicit permission from Metron, updated Hanni with public information and statistics from his research and analysis. Hanni, in return, provided Foreman with data and information she acquired about surface delays. In his final report, Foreman pinpoints Delta as an airline experiencing excessive surface delays. 2 12. During the time Hanni was sharing information with Foreman, Hanni s personal computer files and Flyersrights e-mail accounts were hacked. America Online ( AOL ), Hanni s e-mail service provider, confirmed the e-mail accounts were hacked. As a result of the hacking, spreadsheets, lists of donors, e-mails, Department of Transportation statistics and Hanni s personal files were redirected to an unknown location. Additionally, all of the information on Hanni s personal laptop was corrupted and rendered useless. 13. On September 25, 2009, Metron executives confronted Foreman with the stolen e- mails and claimed Delta, a client of Metron, was angry about Hanni getting information that would help pass the Airline Passenger Bill of Rights. 3 Metron had the stolen e-mails and files from AOL and Hanni s personal computer in its possession. 2 Exhibit C, Excessive Surface Delay Final Report 3 Exhibit D, Affidavit of Frederick J. Foreman 4

Case 4:09-cv-03305 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 5 of 8 14. When Foreman asked Metron how Metron obtained the information, Metron claimed that Delta had provided them with the stolen e-mails. 4 Confirming Metron s claims, the screenshots of the stolen e-mails presented to Foreman were from Delta. Foreman was fired by Metron the same day. V. EXHIBITS 15. Plaintiffs attach and incorporate the following: Exhibit A: H.R. 624, Airline Passenger Bill of Rights Act of 2009; Exhibit B: S. 213, Airline Passenger Bill of Rights Act of 2009; Exhibit C: Exhibit D: Excessive Surface Delay Final Report; and Affidavit of Frederick J. Foreman, PhD. VI. CONSPIRACY 16. Defendants conspired to accomplish an unlawful purpose or a lawful purposed by an unlawful means. Defendants had a meeting of the minds in their course of action and one or all committed an unlawful, overt act to further the object or their course of action. 17. Specifically, Delta conspired with Metron (or others) to obtain Plaintiffs emails and computer files. Delta then provided Metron with the illegally obtained emails and files from Plaintiffs computer and AOL account. 18. Defendants conspired to hack or obtain hacked information from Plaintiffs computer and AOL account, with the purpose of derailing the Airline Passenger Bill of Rights of 2009." As a result, Plaintiffs suffered injury as a proximate cause of such wrongful acts. 4 Id. 5

Case 4:09-cv-03305 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 6 of 8 VII. INVASION OF PRIVACY 19. Defendants intentionally intruded upon Hanni s solitude, seclusion or private affairs and concerns. Defendants intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person and was unwarranted and unjustified. 20. Specifically, Delta hacked Hanni s computer and accessed Hanni s personal e-mail and files without authorization. Delta illegally obtained personal and private information that they later gave to Metron. 21. Defendants invaded Hanni s privacy, with the purpose of derailing the Airline Passenger Bill of Rights of 2009." As a result, Plaintiffs suffered injury as a proximate cause of such the intrusion. VIII. DAMAGES 22. Plaintiffs respectfully request the following damages to be considered separately and individually for the purpose of determining the sum of money that will fairly and reasonably compensate Plaintiffs: a. All compensatory and economic damages; b. Mental anguish suffered by Hanni, for the past and future; c. All reasonable expenses incurred by Plaintiffs, including court costs and reasonable and necessary attorney fees; and d. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. 23. Plaintiffs are requesting at least $1,000,000.00 in actual damages. 6

Case 4:09-cv-03305 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 7 of 8 IX. EXEMPLARY DAMAGES 24. Defendants malicious conduct, when viewed from the standpoint of the actor at the time of the occurrence, involved an extreme degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others. Furthermore, Defendants conduct was willful, intentional and malicious. Defendants conduct illustrates not only an attitude of conscious indifference for the rights, safety and welfare of others, but also shows Defendants actual and subjective awareness of the dangers of such conduct. 25. Nevertheless, Defendants proceeded intentionally or with a conscious indifference to the rights, safety or welfare of others, including Plaintiffs. Therefore, Defendants are liable for exemplary/punitive damages. As punishment for Defendants actions and to deter such actions in the future, Plaintiffs are requesting at least $10,000,000.00 in exemplary/punitive damages. X. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 26. All conditions precedent have been performed or have occurred as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(c). XI. JURY DEMAND 27. Plaintiffs assert their rights under the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution and demands, in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38, a trial by jury on all issues. 7

Case 4:09-cv-03305 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 8 of 8 XII. PRAYER 28. For the above reasons, Plaintiffs pray they have judgment against Defendants, with interest on the judgment at the legal rate, pre-judgment interest, costs of court and for such other relief, both in law and equity, to which Plaintiffs may show themselves justly entitled. Respectfully Submitted, THE GIBSON LAW FIRM Jason A. Gibson State Bar No. 24000606 The Lyric Centre 440 Louisiana, Suite 2050 Houston, Texas 77002 Ph: (713) 650-1010 Fax: (713) 650-1011 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 8