The Judge Wanted One Answer. Ben Just Gave It.

[00:00:00]We finally have the answer. In my last video, I told you Reckless Ben's entire escape to federal court could come down to one piece of information. Who actually owns Reckless Ben LLC? The judge gave Ben's lawyers until July 21st to answer that question or potentially watch this entire case get shipped right back to the Utah state court where the original gag order was born. Well, Ben's lawyers didn't wait till July 21st, that's today. In fact, within minutes of my last video going live, this hit the federal docket. And what's inside this boring two-page document is bigger than the timing cuz Reckless Ben just told a federal judge on the record where he really lives. Is the crack sealed? Is the escape final? And what does this mean for the next big move in this case?

[00:00:47]I'm America's attorney. I've been a lawyer for 25 years. I've helped over 12 million people and today I'm breaking down the filing that could end the remand threat, the on-the-record statement about where Reckless Ben calls home, and what happens next cuz if the housekeeping is over, THE REAL FIGHT STARTS NOW. SO, let's get started.

[00:01:06]Actually, no. THIS IS WHERE I REMIND you that if you have not yet subscribed, a federal JUDGE SAYS TODAY is the day. HIT THE BUTTON.

[00:01:15]>> YES, SIR.

[00:01:15]>> [screaming] >> YES, SIR, SERGEANT.

[00:01:17]>> IF YOU MISSED THE last video, here's why this filing matters. Ben's lawyers moved the Bricks and Minifigs lawsuit out of Utah state court and into federal court using something called diversity jurisdiction. But there was a problem.

[00:01:29]Their removal paperwork said Reckless Ben LLC was a California limited liability company. Legally, that doesn't tell the judge where an LLC is actually a citizen. For that, the court needs to know every member of the LLC and where each of those members is a citizen. So, Judge David Barlow gave Ben's team until July 21st to fill in that missing information. Well, now we know who Ben's lawyers say the members are. Or more accurately, the member because according to this new filing, there's only a one.

[00:01:58]The new disclosure says, and I quote, "The sole member of Reckless Ben LLC was Benjamin Schneider, an individual. There are no other members of Reckless Ben LLC." And that makes the citizenship analysis incredibly simple. There's no second owner hiding inside the LLC, no corporate nesting doll where we have to trace one company through another company through another company through another company until every lawyer in the room retires. According to this filing, the analysis starts and stops with Ben. And his lawyers say that when this lawsuit was filed and when they submitted this disclosure, Ben resided in California with the intent to remain there, making California his domicile.

[00:02:38]And that's the key legal concept here, domicile. For an individual, citizenship for diversity jurisdiction is based on domicile, >> Big word for Elmo.

[00:02:46]>> which generally means where you live with the intent to remain, not just where you happen to be standing when someone hands you a lawsuit. The judge asked Ben's lawyers to identify every member of Reckless Ben LLC and establish their citizenship. Their answer, there's just one member, it's Ben and he's domiciled in California. So, did Ben's lawyers fix it? Well, based on this filing, it certainly looks like they addressed the specific problem that Judge Barlow identified. The judge wanted to know who the members of Reckless Ben LLC are and where their citizens. Ben's lawyers responded, there's one member, Benjamin Schneider, and they say he's domiciled in California. Judge Barlow has not yet issued a new order saying problem solved, federal jurisdiction confirmed.

[00:03:23]So, I'm not declaring victory until the judge does, but remember the two worlds we talked about in the last video. Right now, this is looking a whole lot more like world one, a paperwork mistake, a slightly embarrassing correction, and everybody moves on. Rather than world two, where Ben's own LLC destroys diversity jurisdiction and sends the case back to Utah state court. So, why does staying in federal court matter so much? Well, remember how we got here.

[00:03:48]Bricks and Minifigs went to Utah state court and got an emergency temporary restraining order without Ben site being heard. Ben's lawyers responded by getting the case out of there and into federal court. That temporary order was replaced by the agreed preliminary injunction. I've already broken that down. Ben can still publicly talk about bricks and minifigs and this lawsuit, although there are now restrictions on certain things he can do while investigating them. If federal jurisdiction holds, Ben stays exactly where his lawyers fought to put him, in front of Judge Barlow, instead of back in state court where the whole lawsuit started. So, here's where we are. July 21st was supposed to be the big deadline. Ben's lawyers beat it by four days. They filed the disclosure, told the court Ben is the sole member of Reckless Ben LLC, and said that he's domiciled in California. Now? Well, we wait. Judge Barlow could be satisfied with that response and the case keeps moving, or the plaintiffs, Bricks and Minifigs, could raise a jurisdictional challenge of their own. Till we see what happens next, I'm not declaring that this jurisdictional issue is officially settled, but I am declaring it 99. 99% settled. Assuming Ben stays in federal court, circle August 3rd on the calendar. That's when defendants are currently due to respond to the complaint. And honestly, that's the filing that I really want to see. When that deadline hits, we got two options.

[00:05:06]Number one, answer everything and the case rolls on into discovery. Option two, file a motion to dismiss. And here's the rule that most people don't know. A motion to dismiss stops the answer clock completely until the judge rules. And my prediction? Motion to dismiss. And if you've been watching this series, you already know why.

[00:05:26]Several videos ago, I told you that Ben's lawyers were dragging Bam's civil RICO claim into a hostile federal forum.

[00:05:33]The motion to dismiss is where we found out if I'm a freaking genius, or if I'm just merely right yet again. Look at how this complaint is built. It doesn't just accuse Ben. It describes an enterprise, a schneider group of agents and associates, plus 15 unnamed Doe defendants, all allegedly conspiring together. In federal court, that's a well, that's a target-rich environment.

[00:05:57]A conspiracy needs specific people doing specific wrongs, not a vague group.

[00:06:02]Fraud has to be played WITH PARTICULARITY. WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE?

[00:06:06]>> WHAT?

[00:06:07]>> AND LUMPING defendants together without saying who did what, mhm, judges call that shotgun pleading, and a motion to dismiss will feast on it. Now, before I let you go, look at the last page of this filing. Spencer Fain represents Bin as LLC and Victor Win, but co-defendant Bryan Mansell has completely different lawyers out of Portland, Oregon. Two defense firms, one lawsuit. Sometimes that's just logistics. Fine, whatever.

[00:06:34]But co-defendants usually don't pay for two sets of lawyers unless somebody thinks their interests might not stay aligned. When the motion to dismiss drops, watch whether both firms file together or apart. Until then, drop your pro se opinion down below in the comments and let me know what you think.

[00:06:50]Are we going to see an answer or motion to dismiss or both? What does Bin's team file when the clock runs out? Let me know what you think. And don't forget while you're down there to lawyer up with me, America's attorney, by hitting that subscribe button cuz I will be back soon with more breakdowns. I don't want you to miss them. You don't want you to miss them. I'll see you then.

[00:07:11]>> [music] >> The judge gave Bin's lawyers until July.

[00:07:18]Each of those members is a citizen.

[00:07:21]Is a citizen.

[00:07:24]Conspiracy needs specific people doing specific >> [music]