Defendant Martin Grunin is a serial offender who has repeatedly and willfully violated Facebook’s terms of service, defrauded Facebook, and abused its users—all for his own handsome profit. Grunin accessed Facebook without authorization, sold access to Facebook advertising accounts without authorization, impersonated other Facebook users to gain control of their advertising accounts, doctored up bank records to make his fraudulent misrepresentations believable, and then used hijacked Facebook advertising accounts to run $340,000 worth of deceptive advertisements (for which he never paid) that tricked Facebook users into visiting commercial websites that lined Grunin’spockets with referral commissions.
Facebook personally served Grunin with the Complaint and Summons on May 22, 2014. Grunin was given ample time to respond to the Complaint, to hire counsel licensed to practice before this Court, and to defend himself. Instead, since the inception of this lawsuit, Grunin has thumbed his nose at Facebook, its counsel, the Court, and, indeed, the entire legal system by littering the docket with documents filled with extortionist demands of the Court, Facebook, and the undersigned counsel—ignoring (and even denying the existence of) the Court’s rules and procedures.
Grunin has failed to show good cause to set aside the default. First, Grunin acted culpably in this matter because he willfully failed to file an answer to theComplaint. Second, Grunin has not articulated a single fact to support a meritorious defense to Facebook’s claims. Third, Facebook will be prejudiced if default is set aside; Grunin’s sworn statements flatly rejecting the U.S. banking system, U.S. currency, the U.S. legal system, and these proceedings suggest he may hide his assets or denytheir existence, robbing Facebook of its opportunity to recover damages. Because Grunin cannot show good cause, his motion should be denied.