1. Post what he sent you so we can see if you were validy notified.

2. I assume what you received was the paperwork for you to waive service. Since you don't have the money to play games, you should waive service so you have the 60 days to answer.

3. You obviously want to challenge the court's personal jurisdiction, since failure to do so can waive your right to do so later. You also want to argue that the complaint fails to state a claim. this is trickier, because while strict pleading is needned for personal jusrisdiction with conspiracy, it looks like notice pleading is sufficient to state a claim. While you can demonstrate that most of the laws he cites don't apply, there might be a possible set of facts under which 42 USC 1985 woud apply, and as a pro se, I believe that as long as he alleges acts that are actionable, he can get away with citing the wrong laws.

4. All he has to say about you is in paragraph 69.

If we omit what isn't actionable we get:

"IP-Wars.net posted stories and content stating Merkey worked for SCO and was a drug addict, advocating his murder, and [posted] contents that invaded his privacy."

So you want to state this in your motion.

5) You want to get the EFF's boilerplate concerning the protections that sites have that don't actively edit their contents, and you want to attach your cite policy as an exhibit with an affidavit as to its authenticity and include all the versions of it that were posted, with their dates. This is your best defense, because it works against most allegations concerning regardless
of their nature. This won't work, unfortunately for anything you posted yourself, or that your co-conspirators posted, but in that case we're back to conspiracy, and the rules are different.

6. You need legal advice about how nonspecific notice pleading can be in these circumstances. it can be pretty vague, but there may be limits. A key case cited is American Nurses Association v. Illinois, but it's a 1976 decision, and I can't find it on line. The gist seems to be that there is no need to allege any facts whatsoever in notice pleading or even be clear or make a claim under the correct law, provided there is some possible set of facts under which a claim is stated. There is also law that says that in pro se cases if the judge can invent a legal basis on which the claims should not be dismissed, then he should do so, since the plaintiff is not a lawyer and can't be expected to get it right.

7. Note that his allegations exist independent of the conspiracy.

8. If you answer the complaint, you have more options, but it's a risky approach, and I can't recommend it. Obviously, if you do, you can make counterclaims and drown him in interrogatories and other discovery requests, but the problem is that the venue is Utah. If you answer, I don't know what the chances are for a change of venue, but I'm guessing not very good.
   

"IP-Wars.net posted stories and content stating Merkey worked for SCO and was a drug addict, advocating his murder, and [posted] contents that invaded his privacy."

These are the charges against Jeff. Translated they are

defamation -  posted stories and content stating Merkey worked for SCO and was a drug addict,

incitement to violence - advocating his murder

invasion of privacy - [posted] contents that invaded his privacy

civil contempt - he's threatened about the sealed settlement and the opinion, but Jeff isn't charged in the complaint with doing this. in fact he never  states this claim against anyone AFAICS.

Conspiracy to violate civil rights

defamation by google bombing and hacking

weird crap - violation of right of expressive association, and identity theft

The important question is what are the pleading requirements for each offense.

I have the answer for defamation. The requirements are relative strict and merkey hasn't met them.

"To state such a claim for defamation, plaintiff 'must show that defendants published the statements concerning him, that the statements were false, defamatory, and not subject to any privilege, that the statements were published with the requisite degree of fault, and that their publication resulted in damage.' Id. at 1007-08. "
Computerized Thermal Imaging Inc. v. Bloomberg, 10th circuit 2002  quoting West v. Thomson Newspapers, 872 P.2d 999 (Utah 1994)

This is a Massachusetts case, but I expect utah is the same:

" A court may dismiss written defamation claims, i.e., libel claims, if the communication is "incapable of a defamatory meaning." Brauer v. Globe Newspaper Co., 217 N.E.2d 736, 738 (Mass. 1966) (quoting Muchnick v. Post Publ'g Co., 125 N.E.2d 137, 138 (Mass. 1955). This threshold question, "whether a communication is reasonably susceptible of a defamatory meaning, is a question of law for the court." Phelan v. May Dept. Stores Co., 819 N.E.2d 550, 554 (Mass. 2004)."

As for advocating his murder, as alleged, that isn't a crime, even if he alleged malice. You can say "someone should shoot the SOB".

With civil rights conspiracy, it comes down to the allegation that all "these websites" engaged in such activity. Considering that includes "numerous other websites", I doubt this states a claim, but I need to do more research.

And as my own head is now well and truly above the parapet - I am identifiable and I have a website about him - I'll take your advice, and hold off from pitching funds in your direction, at least until I get some feeling about whether he's likely to try to sue me here in Scotland.  (If he names me in US suit, well, any defense you mount would probably apply to me as well, and he has the additional difficulty of obtaining juristiction.)

Finally, thanks to everyone who has been lending your support up to this point. It means a lot to me!

A number of things strike me as odd:

1. Their homepage is quite sparse and vacant. No activities? Plans? Pictures of members engaging in activities? A church house even?

2. The adress and phone #s of this 'church' are the same as Merkey's home adress and number in his filings.

3. There isn't any real evidence anywhere that this church has any members other than Mr. Merkey. Googling for "utah-nac.org" or "Utah Native American Church" doesn't seem to find anything significant other than things relating directly to Merkey. Is it really the case that no other member has ever made reference to the church online?

4. According to Merkey's filing, the "church" has programs helping people in prison and donates $100,000 a year to that. Despite this, they can't seem to afford some kind of place to run their activities out of, other than Merkey's home? And despite this generous donation, noone else has made mention of it online?

5. Finally. Well, there is one member. Merkey claims a Mr. Darrell Garner (although he misspells the name once) was "The religious leader of the Uncompaghre Ute People and the Utah Native American Church".
   

To become a member of the Utah Native American Church, you must be a member of a Federally recognized  Tribe, Nation, or Community of Indians and possess a Tribal Membership Card and a Cerificate Degree of Indian  Blood issued by an agency of the Unites State Bureau of Indian Affairs.

According to the Deseret News:

Darrell Gardner, who calls himself a "mixed-blood," said that although he is not enrolled in a federally recognized tribe, the U.S. Justice Department contracted with him for 15 years to conduct religious services in sweat lodges in state prisons in Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Texas and Canada.

Oh, so this church had a "religious leader" who wasn't even eligible for membership? Or maybe, just perhaps, Mr. Merkey and his church really didn't have much to do with Mr. Gardner at all? Mr. Merkey could simply be associating himself with Gardner as much as possible, and trying to draw credit from his prison work?

IANAL and you should talk to one, but I'm tending to the theory that you might want to force him to serve you. The point is that I don't know that the waiver of service constitutes service.

If you are served in your home state, then that state and by extension its federal district courts have personal jurisdiction over JVM. This means:

1. When there is a final judgment against him, you can sue for damages in CA. This would include dismissal with prejudice, and you probably need to file a motion asking for the suit to be declared frivolous.

2. Service in your state may bring him under the CA anti-SLAPP law. Most of his claims are Utah state law claims federalized by diversity jurisdiction, assuming the civil rights conspiracy is dismissed. So the sequence would be get the federal law claims dismissed and then sue in federal court in CA with your own diversity jurisdiction claim. I don't know that this will be allowed, but if it is, you want to preserve the option. Point 1 above isn't much use against someone with no assets, but the CA anti-SLAPP law has teeth.

Go to the EFF and the ACLU and see if you can get legal advice, even if you can't get complete representation. It's important not to screw up the initial procedural steps.

3. The downside of refusing to waive service, is that it reduces your time to respond.

4. You have 30 days to return the waiver of service and 60 days from then to make your response. Should you be served, you have 20 days to respond. Should you be served after you have recieved the waiver, but before the 30 days have expired, you shouldn't be on the hook for the cost of service, since the service was voluntary.

5. If he's going to serve you, you don't have any time to waste. You need to get your motion to dismiss drafted. Go and look at a guide to civil procedure for lawyers (a sort of cheat sheet with forms and explanations). Westlaw sells a bunch of them in the $30 to $100 range. I've ordered Federal Civil Rules Handbook, 2005 ed. and Friedenthal, Kane and Miller's Hornbook on Civil Procedure, 4th. I ordered expedited shipping, but it will probably still take nearly a week, so you may not want to wait for my opinion, even if it was worth waiting for.

Jeff, in case I haven't said “Thanks” recently, well: Thank you.

Keep the faith. I suspect we're having an impact.

You should get a copy of everything, especially when he plays judge and jury, and accuses you of some crime.  I am still not sure if he has a specific verifiable accusation against you.