BULLETIN: Federal Judge Denies Motion By ASD Figures Dwight Owen Schweitzer And Todd Disner For Government To Produce Names Of Potentially Thousands Of ASD Members Who Filed For Remissions
BULLETIN: (UPDATED 8:06 P.M. EDT U.S.A.) A federal judge in Florida has denied a motion by AdSurfDaily figures Todd Disner and Dwight Owen Schweitzer that, if granted, could have made the duo privy to information on the identities of any ASD participant who filed a claim for remissions in the ASD Ponzi case, their financial stake in ASD and how much money was returned to them by the government through the remissions claims process.
U.S. District Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga said no today, ruling that Schweitzer and Disner had not shown why they were entitled to the information and that the government was not compelled to produce it.
The flap started when Disner and Schweitzer asserted earlier this month that a certificate of interested parties filed by the government in the Disner/Schweitzer lawsuit was “inadequate as a matter of law” because it didn’t include the information on individuals who filed remissions claims. Court records show that about 11,000 ASD members filed claims in the case.
The government countered by arguing that Disner and Schweitzer were confusing the ASD forfeiture case filed in the District of Columbia with their own lawsuit filed in Florida.
Altonaga sided with the government today, ruling that the government certificate as it stands “is not necessarily incomplete for failing to list those who have a financial interest in other forfeiture proceedings.”
“Plaintiffs fail to explain in their Motion why unnamed parties who may have a financial interest in other forfeiture proceedings also have an interest in Plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment action,” Altonaga ruled.
And the judge further pointed out that Disner and Schweitzer had not complied with her order to file their own certificates in the case. She now has given them until July 6 to do so, warning that “[f]ailure to comply will result in the entry of an order of dismissal without prejudice without further notice.”