LOS ANGELES—The attorney for Alexander Rhodes, founder of NoFap LLC, has been accused of misrepresenting facts in a civil RICO case Rhodes brought against Pornhub's parent company, Aylo, two scientists, the University of California, Los Angeles, and an academic publisher. Rhodes alleges that Aylo bankrolled a supposed conspiracy to defame him and his anti-porn, anti-masturbation group.
The suit centers on allegations by Rhodes that a scheme operated and funded by Aylo was intended to discredit him and his organization's claims. Further, the attorney for Rhodes earlier this year claimed racketeering and a civil conspiracy under federal RICO statutes. This came after it was revealed that Rhodes demanded $20 million from the parent company of academic publisher Taylor & Francis as an offer to avoid litigation.
Now, Dr. Nicole Prause has filed a petition for sanctions against Rhodes' attorney. Prause is one of the two scientists named in the lawsuit who were critical of Rhodes and the NoFap movement's claims. When Rhodes and his attorney, David Kobylinski, made claims of civil conspiracy to commit racketeering under federal RICO laws, Prause was presented as a willing participant in an alleged criminal enterprise that included sex trafficking.
In response to such claims, Prause's attorney filed a Rule 11 motion with the judge at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, in Pittsburgh.
Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which dictates attorney conduct in civil cases, allows counsel for a party to the litigation to file a motion against an attorney who files documents with the court that are frivolous, legally unreasonable, filed for improper purposes such as harassment and intimidation, or lack a clear factual basis.
"[The] plaintiffs’ claims in their entirety amount to a vexatious campaign to stop scientists from documenting the harms of his violent male supremacist group, are completely baseless, contain complete fabrications, and are unmoored from reality," argues David G. Volk, a partner at Cipriani & Werner, P.C.'s office in Philadelphia. Volk leads Prause's defense in this case.
"Specifically, certain allegations are frivolous, lack any evidentiary support whatsoever, and are flatly disputed by Dr. Prause by way of declaration given under the penalties of perjury," Volk notes.
This motion derives from claims made in a RICO case statement filed in January. Replete with accusations against Aylo of an alleged conspiracy, the RICO case statement filed by Kobylinski intimated that Prause was involved in racketeering and an organized criminal enterprise to defame and discredit Rhodes.
"All of the listed defendants conspired in a scheme and engaged in a pattern and practice of attacking, defaming, threatening, and/or undermining plaintiffs’ legitimate personal and/or business interests for the purpose of profiting their enterprise," Kobylinski claims in the RICO case statement. He further asserts that he and his client "believe that there may be numerous other entities involved in the scheme whereby they engaged in a pattern and practice of attacking, defaming, threatening, and/or undermining plaintiffs' legitimate personal and/or business interests for the purpose of profiting their enterprise."
"Mr. Rhodes goes on to allege that Dr. Prause falsely accused him of threatening to stalk Dr. Prause, cyberstalking Dr. Prause and other women, harassing Dr. Prause, being subject to a restraining order, being misogynistic, and promoting the 'Proud Boys,'" Volk said. "Accordingly, given that the aforementioned allegations are plainly frivolous and warrant sanctions based upon the attached declaration of Defendant, Nicole Prause, Ph.D, and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise, Defendant respectfully requests that sanctions be issued at this time in an amount and fashion that the Court deems just and appropriate under the circumstances."
The case is ongoing.
