2021-04-30 Request For Emergency Status Conference Re The Court - S SUA Sponte Release of Exhibit D9 To The Public

1
2
3
4
5
Dennis I. Wilenchik, #005350
6
John “Jack” D. Wilenchik, #029353
7 Jordan C. Wolff, #034110
admin@wb-law.com
8 Attorneys for Defendant Cyber Ninjas, Inc.
9
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
10 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
11
ARIZONA DEMOCRATIC PARTY, an Case No.: CV2021-006646
12 Arizona political party and political action
committee; STEVE GALLARDO, a REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY STATUS
13 qualified elector, CONFERENCE REGARDING THE
14 COURT’S SUA SPONTE RELEASE OF
Plaintiffs, EXHIBIT D9 TO THE PUBLIC
15 vs.
16
KAREN FANN, in her official capacity as (Assigned to the
17 President of the Arizona Senate; WARREN Honorable Daniel Martin)
PETERSEN, in his official capacity as
18 Chairman of the Senate Judiciary
19 Committee; KEN BENNETT, in his official
capacity as the liaison of the Arizona Senate;
20 and CYBER NINJAS, INC., a Florida
corporation,
21
22 Defendants.
23 Defendant Cyber Ninja, Inc. (“Cyber Ninjas”), by and through undersigned counsel,
24 request an Emergency Status Conference Regarding the Court’s Sue Sponte Release of Exhibit
25 D9 to the public.
26 On April 26, 2021, Cyber Ninjas filed its Motion To File Ex Parte And Under Seal [Arcp
27 5.4] And Notice Of Lodging (“Motion to Seal”). The Motion to Seal contained Exhibit D9 and
28 Exhibit D10. Subsequently, on April 28, 2021, the Court held a hearing on the Motion to Seal,
1 inter alia. The Court denied the Motion to Seal, but as its part of the Order the Court stayed its
2 ruling “until 12:00 p.m. on April 29, 2021 in order to allow Defendant Cyber Ninjas, Inc. … time
3 to seek appellate review.” See Min Entry, Apr. 29, 2021, at 3.
4 On April 29, 2021 at 11:02 am, fifty-eight (58) minutes prior to the 12:00 pm deadline,
5 undersigned counsel emailed the following to the Court’s judicial assistant:
6 Defendant Cyber Ninjas, Inc.’s previously filed Motion to Seal
documents, which has been commonly referred to as Exhibit D.
7 Yesterday, the Court denied the Motion to Seal and gave Cyber Ninjas
until 12:00 pm today to produce Exhibit D to Plaintiff Arizona
8 Democratic Party. Exhibit D contains subpart D9 which is the Arizona
Audit Security Overview (“Exhibit D9”). Exhibit D9 contains security
9 information that should not be available to the public. Cyber Ninja
and Plaintiff and intervenors have reached an agreement regarding
10 Exhibit D9. Accordingly, we request that the Court not publicly
release Exhibit D9 or instruct the Clerk of Court to publicly release
11 Exhibit D9.
12 Please let us know if the Court would prefer that the parties file a
stipulated motion regarding Exhibit D9 or have a quick status
13 conference to discuss further.
14 See Email, dated April 29, 2021, attached hereto as Exhibit A.1
15 At 11:38 am, the Court’s judicial assistant stated that “The Court would prefer that the
16 parties file a stipulated motion regarding Exhibit D9.” See id. Accordingly, undersigned counsel
17 drafted the stipulated motion and emailed it to all parties involved in this matter.
18 At 12:58 pm, the Court’s judicial assistant sent an email to undersigned counsel, Ms. Desai,
19 and Mr. Langhofer, which stated, “The Court is asking for an update on the stipulated motion.”
20 Undersigned counsel informed the Court’s judicial assistant that “All parties have been provided
21 a proposed joint stipulated motion. I am waiting on approval. I will follow-up with the Court once
22 the parties have approved the joint stipulated motion.”2 Id.
23 At 3:32 pm, Cyber Ninjas filed the Stipulation To Seal Exhibit D9 (the “Stipulation”),
24 which requested that the Court seal Exhibit D9 because it contained “sensitive security
25 information regarding the Audit taking place at the Arizona Veterans Memorial Coliseum[.]” Stip.
26
1
Rooplai Desai and Kory Langhofer were included on the email.
27 2
Undersigned counsel informed the Court that Cyber Ninja had already disclosed Exhibit D to
28 the plaintiffs. See Ex. A.
2
1 To Seal Ex. D9 at 1:25-27 attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Stipulation also stated that the parties
2 agreed that Exhibit D9 will be produced with the designation “Attorney’s Eyes Only” and
3 identified the parties that were authorized to review the document. Id. at 1:28-2:1, n. 1.3 A courtesy
4 copy of the Stipulation was provided to the Court’s judicial assistant at 3:45 pm, and three minutes
5 later, the Court’s judicial assistant responded, “Thank you.” See Email attached hereto as Exhibit
6 C. 4
7 Although the Court had knowledge since 11:02 am that the Parties agreed that Exhibit D9
8 should be sealed and not made available to the public, the Court released Exhibit D9 to the public
9 via Maricopa County’s Clerk of the Superior Court website.5 See Image attached hereto as Exhibit
10 D. It is not known when the Court released the Exhibit D9, it began to appear on the internet after
11 6:00 pm. At or around 10:12 pm, ABC15.com published an article describing details of Exhibit
12 D9 and had knowledge of the agreement between the parties that Exhibit D9 was not to be release
13 to the public. See Article attached hereto as Exhibit E.6
14 Therefore, Cyber Ninjas request an emergency status conference regarding the public
15 disclosure of Exhibit D9.
16 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 29th day of April, 2021.
17 WILENCHIK & BARTNESS, P.C.
18 /s/ Jordan C. Wolff
Dennis I. Wilenchik, Esq.
19 John “Jack” D. Wilenchik, Esq.
20 Jordan C. Wolff, Esq
The Wilenchik & Bartness Building
21 2810 North Third Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
22 admin@wb-law.com
Attorneys for Defendant Cyber Ninjas, Inc.
23
24 3
Cyber Ninja produced Exhibit D, including Exhibit D9, which was designated as “Attorney’s
Eyes Only” to plaintiffs prior to the 12:00 pm deadline. See Email attached as Exhibit F.
25 4
The Court entered an Order granting the Stipulation on April 30, 2021. See Exhibit G.
26 5
Cyber Ninjas was not provided any notice that the Court was going to publicly release Exhibit
D9.
27 6
https://www.abc15.com/news/state/cyber-ninjas-security-plan-details-anticipated-attack-by-
28 antifa
3
1 ELECTRONICALLY FILED April 29, 2021 via AZTurboCourt
2 ELECTRONICALLY SERVED April 29, 2021 via AZTurboCourt upon:
3
James E. Barton II Kory Langhofer
4 Jacqueline Mendez Soto Thomas Basile
Barton Mendez Statecraft PLLC
5 Soto PLLC 649 N. Fourth Ave., 1st Fl.
401 W. Baseline Rd., Ste. 205 Phoenix, Arizona 85003
6
Tempe, Arizona 85283 kory@statecraftlaw.com
7 james@bartonmendezsoto.com tom@statecraftlaw.com
jacqueline@bartonmendezsoto.com Attorneys for Karen Fann, Warren Petersen, and
8 Attorneys for Plaintiff Steve Gallardo Ken Bennett
9 Roopali H. Desai Mary R. O’Grady
10 D. Andrew Gaona Joshua D. Bendor,
Kristen Yost Emma J. Cone-Roddy
11 Coppersmith Brockelman PLC OSBORN MALEDON, P.A.
2800 N. Central Ave., Ste. 1900 2929 North Central Avenue, 21st Fl.
12 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2793
rdesai@cblawyers.com mogrady@omlaw.com
13 agaona@cblawyers.com jbendor@omlaw.com
14 kyost@cblawyers.com econe-roddy@omlaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Arizona Democratic Party Attorneys for Secretary of State Katie Hobbs
15
Daniel C. Barr, Esq.
16 Samantha J. Burke, Esq.
2901 N. Central Ave., Ste. 2000
17 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2788
18 DBarr@perkinscoie.com
SBurke@perkinscoie.com
19 Attorneys for First Amendment Coalition of
Arizona, Inc.
20
21
/s/ Hilary Myers
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
EXHIBIT A
RE: Cyber Ninjas adv Arizona Democratic Party Case No. CV2021-006646 -
Previously Filed Sealed and Ex Parte Documents
Irene Jones (SUP) <Irene.Jones@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>
Thu 4/29/2021 1 40 PM
To: Jordan Wolff <JordanW@wb-law.com>
Cc: Dennis Wilenchik <diw@wb-law.com>; Jack Wilenchik <JackW@wb-law.com>; Roopali Desai
(rdesai@cblawyers.com) <rdesai@cblawyers.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>; Amber Bivens (SUP)
<Amber.Bivens@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>
Thank you. I will update the Court.
Respectfully,
Irene H. Jones
Judicial Assistant to
The Honorable Daniel G. Martin
101 W. Jefferson Street - 412
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone 602-372-2925
Fax 602-372-8640
Please copy our Courtroom Assistant Amber Bivens when emailing this division.
Amber.Bivens@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov

From: Jordan Wolff <JordanW@wb-law.com>

Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 1:39 PM
To: Irene Jones (SUP) <Irene.Jones@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>
(rdesai@cblawyers.com) <rdesai@cblawyers.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>; Amber
Bivens (SUP) <Amber.Bivens@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: Re: Cyber Ninjas adv Arizona Democratic Party Case No. CV2021-006646 - Previously Filed
Sealed and Ex Parte Documents
Ms. Jones,

All parties have been provided a proposed joint stipulated motion. I am waiting on approval. I will follow-
up with the Court once the parties have approved the joint stipulated motion. It should be noted that
Cyber Ninjas has produced Exhibit D to the plaintiffs.
Jordan Wolff
Attorney
JordanW@wb-law.com

2810 North Third Street
P 602‑606‑2810 | F 602‑606‑2811
www.wb-law.com
----------------------------
ATTORNEY/CLIENT COMMUNICATION
The information transmitted by this e-mail is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. Any interception, review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient is prohibited by law and may subject them to criminal or civil liability. If you received this
communication in error, please contact us immediately at (602) 606-2810, and delete the communication from any computer or
network system.
----------------------------
From: Irene Jones (SUP) <Irene.Jones@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>

(rdesai@cblawyers.com) <rdesai@cblawyers.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>; Irene
Jones (SUP) <Irene.Jones@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>; Amber Bivens (SUP)
<Amber.Bivens@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>; Irene Jones (SUP) <Irene.Jones@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: RE: Cyber Ninjas adv Arizona Democratic Party Case No. CV2021-006646 - Previously Filed
Counsel,
The Court is asking for an update on the stipulated motion.
Respectfully,
Irene H. Jones
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone 602-372-2925
Fax 602-372-8640

From: Irene Jones (SUP)
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 11:38 AM
(rdesai@cblawyers.com) <rdesai@cblawyers.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>;
irene.jones@jbazmc.maricopa.gov; Amber Bivens (SUP) <Amber.Bivens@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: RE: Cyber Ninjas adv Arizona Democratic Party Case No. CV2021-006646 - Previously Filed
Importance: High
Counsel,
The Court would prefer that the parties file a stipulated motion regarding Exhibit D9.
Respectfully,
Irene H. Jones
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone 602-372-2925
Fax 602-372-8640


(rdesai@cblawyers.com) <rdesai@cblawyers.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>
Subject: Cyber Ninjas adv Arizona Democratic Party Case No. CV2021-006646 - Previously Filed
Ms. Jones,

Defendant Cyber Ninjas, Inc. previously filed Motion to Seal documents, which has been commonly
referred to as Exhibit D. Yesterday, the Court denied the Motion to Seal and gave Cyber Ninjas until
12:00 pm today to produce Exhibit D to Plaintiff Arizona Democratic Party. Exhibit D contains subpart D9
which is the Arizona Audit Security Overview ("Exhibit D9"). Exhibit D9 contains security information that
should not be available to the public. Cyber Ninja and Plaintiff and intervenors have reached an
agreement regarding Exhibit D9. Accordingly, we request that the Court not publicly release Exhibit D9
or instruct the Clerk of Court to publicly release Exhibit D9.

Please let us know if the Court would prefer that the parties file a stipulated motion regarding Exhibit D9
or have a quick status conference to discuss further.
Jordan Wolff
Attorney
JordanW@wb-law.com

www.wb-law.com P 602‑606‑2810 | F 602‑606‑2811
----------------------------
network system.
----------------------------
EXHIBIT B
Clerk of the Superior Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
M. Bouise, Deputy
4/29/2021 3:42:29 PM
Filing ID 12837349
1
2
3
4
5
Dennis I. Wilenchik, #005350
6
John “Jack” D. Wilenchik, #029353
7 Jordan C. Wolff, #034110
admin@wb-law.com
9
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
10 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
11
ARIZONA DEMOCRATIC PARTY, an Case No.: CV2021-006646
12 Arizona political party and political action
committee; STEVE GALLARDO, a STIPULATION TO SEAL EXHIBIT D9
13 qualified elector,
14
Plaintiffs, (Assigned to the
15 vs. Honorable Daniel Martin)
16
KAREN FANN, in her official capacity as
17 President of the Arizona Senate; WARREN
PETERSEN, in his official capacity as
18 Chairman of the Senate Judiciary
19 Committee; KEN BENNETT, in his official
capacity as the liaison of the Arizona Senate;
20 and CYBER NINJAS, INC., a Florida
corporation,
21
22 Defendants.
23 The Parties, by and through undersigned counsel, submit their Stipulation to Seal Exhibit
24 D9. Exhibit D9 was previously filed under seal as part of Defendant’s Cyber Ninjas, Inc’s Motion
25 to File Ex Parte and Under Seal on April 26, 2021. Cyber Ninjas asserts that Exhibit D9 contains
26 sensitive security information regarding the Audit taking place at the Arizona Veterans Memorial
27 Coliseum and, therefore, should not be published. The Parties stipulate that Exhibit D9 may be
28 filed under seal until this Court instructs otherwise. The Parties have agreed that Exhibit D9 will
1 be produced with the designation of “Attorney’s Eyes Only.”1 The Parties further agree that, if
2 Plaintiffs or Intervenors wish to contest the “Attorney’s Eyes Only” designation on Exhibit D9,
3 they will first seek to resolve the issue with Defendant Cyber Ninjas and, if no resolution can be
4 reached, seek relief from this Court.
5 Therefore, the Parties request that the Court enter an Order and instruct the Clerk of Court
6 to file Exhibit D9 under seal until this Court instructs otherwise. A proposed form of Order
7 approving this Stipulation is lodged contemporaneously herewith.
8
9 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 29th day of April, 2021.
10 WILENCHIK & BARTNESS, P.C.
11
/s/ Jordan C. Wolff
12 Dennis I. Wilenchik, Esq.
John “Jack” D. Wilenchik, Esq.
13 Jordan C. Wolff, Esq
14 2810 North Third Street
15
admin@wb-law.com
17 STATECRAFT PLLC
18 /s/ Kory Langhofer (with permission)
19 Kory Langhofer, Esq.
Thomas Basile, Esq.
20 Statecraft PLLC
649 N. Fourth Ave., 1st Fl.
21 Phoenix, Arizona 85003
kory@statecraftlaw.com
22 tom@statecraftlaw.com
23 Attorneys for Defendants Arizona Senate President Karen
Fann, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Warren
24 Petersen, and Ken Bennett
25
26
27 1
Only counsel of record and, in the case of the Secretary of State, her State Elections Director
28 and expert observers, will have access to and review Exhibit D9.
2
COPPERSMITH BROCKELMAN PLC
1
/s/ Roopali H. Desai (with permission)
2 Roopali H. Desai, Esq.
3 D. Andrew Gaona, Esq.
Kristen Yost, Esq.
4 Coppersmith Brockelman PLC
2800 N. Central Ave., Ste. 1900
5 Phoenix, Arizona 85004
rdesai@cblawyers.com
6 agaona@cblawyers.com
7 kyost@cblawyers.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Arizona Democratic Party and Steve
8 Gallardo
9 BARTON MENDEZ SOTO PLLC
10 /s/ James E. Barton (with permission)

James E. Barton II, Esq.
11 Jacqueline Mendez Soto, Esq.
401 W. Baseline Rd., Ste. 205
12 Tempe, Arizona 85283
13 james@bartonmendezsoto.com
jacqueline@bartonmendezsoto.com
14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Arizona Democratic Party and Steve
Gallardo
15
OSBORN MALEDON, P.A.
16
/s/ Joshua D. Bendor (with permission)
17 Mary R. O’Grady, Esq.
Joshua D. Bendor, Esq.
18 Emma J. Cone-Roddy, Esq.
OSBORN MALEDON, P.A.
19
2929 N. Central Ave., 21st Fl.
20 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2793
mogrady@omlaw.com
21 jbendor@omlaw.com
econe-roddy@omlaw.com
22 Attorneys for Secretary of State Katie Hobbs
23 PERKINS COIE LLP
24 /s/ Daniel C. Barr (with permission)
25 Samantha J. Burke, Esq.
26 2901 N. Central Ave., Ste. 2000
Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2788
28 Attorneys for First Amendment Coalition of Arizona, Inc.
3
1
ELECTRONICALLY FILED April 29, 2021 via AZTurboCourt
2
ELECTRONICALLY SERVED April 29, 2021 via AZTurboCourt upon:
3
James E. Barton II Kory Langhofer
4 Jacqueline Mendez Soto Thomas Basile
5 Barton Mendez Statecraft PLLC
Soto PLLC 649 N. Fourth Ave., 1st Fl.
6 401 W. Baseline Rd., Ste. 205 Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Tempe, Arizona 85283 kory@statecraftlaw.com
7 james@bartonmendezsoto.com tom@statecraftlaw.com
jacqueline@bartonmendezsoto.com Attorneys for Karen Fann, Warren Petersen, and
8 Attorneys for Plaintiff Steve Gallardo Ken Bennett
9
Roopali H. Desai Mary R. O’Grady
10 D. Andrew Gaona Joshua D. Bendor,
Kristen Yost Emma J. Cone-Roddy
11 Coppersmith Brockelman PLC OSBORN MALEDON, P.A.
2800 N. Central Ave., Ste. 1900 2929 North Central Avenue, 21st Fl.
12 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2793
13 rdesai@cblawyers.com mogrady@omlaw.com
agaona@cblawyers.com jbendor@omlaw.com
14 kyost@cblawyers.com econe-roddy@omlaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Arizona Democratic Party Attorneys for Secretary of State Katie Hobbs
15
16
Samantha J. Burke, Esq.
17 2901 N. Central Ave., Ste. 2000
Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2788
19 Attorneys for First Amendment Coalition of
Arizona, Inc.
20
21
/s/ Hilary Myers
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
EXHIBIT C
RE: CV2021-006646 (Cyber Ninjas, et al ADV AZ Democratic Party, et al)
Irene Jones (SUP) <Irene.Jones@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>
Thu 4/29/2021 3 48 PM
To: Hilary Myers <HilaryM@wb-law.com>
Cc: Dennis Wilenchik <diw@wb-law.com>; Jack Wilenchik <JackW@wb-law.com>; Jordan Wolff <JordanW@wb-
law.com>; Victoria Stevens <VictoriaS@wb-law.com>; Jennifer Alvarez <jennifera@wb-law.com>; Christine Ferreira
<ChristineF@wb-law.com>
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Irene H. Jones
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone 602-372-2925
Fax 602-372-8640

From: Hilary Myers <HilaryM@wb-law.com>

Cc: Dennis Wilenchik <diw@wb-law.com>; Jack Wilenchik <JackW@wb-law.com>; Jordan Wolff
<JordanW@wb-law.com>; Victoria Stevens <VictoriaS@wb-law.com>; Jennifer Alvarez <jennifera@wb-
law.com>; Christine Ferreira <ChristineF@wb-law.com>
Subject: CV2021-006646 (Cyber Ninjas, et al ADV AZ Democratic Party, et al)

Irene – Attached please find the Stip to Seal Exhibit D9 and proposed Order which have just been filed
thru AZTurboCourt.
Hilary Myers
Legal Assistant
HilaryM@wb-law.com

www.wb-law.com P 602‑606‑2810 | F 602‑606‑2811
----------------------------
network system.
----------------------------
EXHIBIT D
4/30/2021 CV2021-006646 | Maricopa County Clerk of Superior Court
CV2021-006646
Arizona Democratic Party et al v. Fann et al
(Documents are listed in reverse chronological order)
Cyber Ninjas Lodged Documents - Exhibits D9 and D10
Cyber Ninjas Lodged Documents - Exhibits D1-D8
4.28.2021 Minute Entry - Hearing
4.27.2021 Minute Entry - Hearing
SOS Notice of Joinder in Proposed Order Granting Prelim. Inj.
Plaintiffs' Notice of Lodging Proposed Prelim. Inj. Order
Cyber Ninjas Motion for Substitution of Counsel
Cyber Ninjas Emergency Motion for Continuance
Cyber Ninjas Credit Memo
4.23.2021 - Supreme Court Order
SOS Motion to Intervene - Part 2
SOS Motion to Intervene - Part 1
Cyber Ninjas Notice of Joinder
Plaintiffs' Notice of Filing of Declarations - Part 3
Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion for TRO - Part 2
Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion for TRO - Part 1
SOS Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief re Cyber Ninjas - Part 2
SOS Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief re Cyber Ninjas - Part 1
« First « Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next » Last » 1 - 20 of 72 items
Chat
https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/records/election-2020/cv2021-006646 1/1
EXHIBIT E
4/30/2021 Cyber Ninjas security plan details anticipated attack by "Antifa"
___
Menu  • Watch Live
Quick links...
BREAKING NEWS
Chandler Police Officer killed amid overnight pursuit that
ended at SanTan Motorplex in Gilbert
ADVERTISEMENT
14% off 10%… 23%…
$329.37 $158.39 $149.31
NEWS  ARIZONA NEWS   
Cyber Ninjas security plan

details anticipated attack by
"Antifa"
-->
CLOSE
ADVERTISEMENT
Start Your Project In Minutes

Eliminate the Hassle of Outside Vendors. Secure, Simple, Fast
eDiscovery.
https://www.abc15.com/news/state/cyber-ninjas-security-plan-details-anticipated-attack-by-antifa 1/16
Documents led accidentally with the Maricopa County Clerk of Court describe scenarios for potential attacks on the auditing
facility by "Antifa” or militias.
By: Garrett Archer , Nicole Valdes

Posted at 10:12 PM, Apr 29, 2021 and last updated 10:11 AM, Apr 30, 2021
PHOENIX — Cyber Ninjas, the Florida company hired by Arizona Senate

Republicans to conduct the controversial recount of 2.1 million Maricopa County
ballots from November’s presidential and senate races, tried to keep its auditing
procedures shielded from public view.
In response to media requests, a Maricopa Superior Court judge ruled Wednesday

that the company must disclose its audit procedures. Attorneys on the case tell
ABC15 that lawyers from both sides agreed to let Cyber Ninjas keep its security
plans under wraps.
Recent Stories from abc15.com
Learn More
Top Videos
CLOSE
B&H Photo Video

Skip Ad
SHOP NOW ADVERTISEMENT
www.bhphotovideo.com/
Ad : (0:29)
Man volunteers over 400 hours during

COVID pandemic
SKIP AD
This evening however, it was included in a public filing along with several other
policies and procedures being used to maintain the integrity of the ballots.
Those documents filed accidentally with the Maricopa County Clerk of Court
describe scenarios for potential attacks on the auditing facility by "Antifa” or
militias.
RELATED: Secretary of State gets observers inside Maricopa County

Election Audit, Cyber Ninjas has to reveal methods
One major component of the plan is a threat assessment of security vulnerabilities

at the Arizona State Fairgrounds, where the audit is being conducted, and
surrounding areas, including streets. Planners laid out scenarios that could
disrupt the ballot-counting process. Antifa is referred to by name.
ADVERTISEMENT
CLOSE
ADVERTISEMENT
It says they “will likely use the backed-up traffic in those six lanes to slow police
and fire response to any perimeter breach operation: Any ad-hoc or opportunistic
incendiary attack.”
It is also determined that there was a “greater threat of militia activity than antifa
activity.” In some areas surrounding the coliseum, but that the “probability and
likelihood are low.”
The security plan also lays out specific plans and positions for security personnel
at the Coliseum, which includes private security company to monitor of the
interior of the building for 24 hours a day, seven days a week while the ballots are
present.
No such disruptions have occurred during the recount.
The document names the Arizona Rangers, a uniformed volunteer law

enforcement auxiliary agency, as the security force at the fairgrounds, and lists
another uknown law enforcement agency.
Cyber Ninja's lists Phoenix Law Enforcement Officers Association as providing at

least two officers for support and a promise of four to eight more if marches or
protests occur. The name of the group is similar to PLEA (Phoenix Law
Enforcement Association) however, PLEA tells ABC15 it is not associated with the
audit.
Neither group is an official state, county or municipal law enforcement agency.
ADVERTISEMENT
CLOSE
ADVERTISEMENT
Ad
Easy as Drag, Drop, Done
Open
Logikcull eDiscovery
The Arizona Senate-led hand recount is scheduled to continue until May 14 at

which time the Coliseum is booked by other parties. Senate liaison and former
Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett has told the public that he expects the
audit to be finished in time for the deadline.
Copyright 2021 Scripps Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Report a typo
Sign up for the Headlines Newsletter and receive up to date information.
E-mail Submit
CURATION BY
Texas 11-year-old faces in-school suspension for

his hairstyle, mom advocates for change
CLOSE
ADVERTISEMENT
Sponsored
6 Credit Cards You Should Not Ignore If You
Have Excellent Credit
EXHIBIT F
Re: AEO designation
Jordan Wolff <JordanW@wb-law.com>
Thu 4/29/2021 11 59 AM
To: Barr, Daniel (Perkins Coie) <DBarr@perkinscoie.com>; Roopali Desai <rdesai@cblawyers.com>
Cc: jbendor@omlaw.com <jbendor@omlaw.com>; Dennis Wilenchik <diw@wb-law.com>; Jack Wilenchik <JackW@wb-
law.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>; jim@bartonmendezsoto.com <jim@bartonmendezsoto.com>;
Andrew Gaona <agaona@cblawyers.com>
3 attachments (13 MB)
Exhibit D1-D8.pdf; Exhibit D9 (AEO).pdf; Exhibit D10.pdf;
Counsel,
Please see Exhibit D attached hereto. Let me know if you have any issues accessing the documents.
From: Barr, Daniel (Perkins Coie) <DBarr@perkinscoie.com>

To: Jordan Wolff <JordanW@wb-law.com>; Roopali Desai <rdesai@cblawyers.com>
Cc: jbendor@omlaw.com <jbendor@omlaw.com>; Dennis Wilenchik <diw@wb-law.com>; Jack
Wilenchik <JackW@wb-law.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>;
jim@bartonmendezsoto.com <jim@bartonmendezsoto.com>; Andrew Gaona
<agaona@cblawyers.com>
Subject: RE: AEO designation

Thanks, Jordan. And to state the obvious, please make sure that Ex. D9 is a separate pdf from the rest of Exhibit D.
Thanks,
Dan
Daniel Barr | Perkins Coie LLP

PARTNER
2901 North Central Avenue Suite 2000
Phoenix, AZ 85012-2788
D. +1.602.351.8085
F. +1.602.648.7085
E. DBarr@perkinscoie.com

To: Roopali Desai <rdesai@cblawyers.com>
Cc: Barr, Daniel (PHX) <DBarr@perkinscoie.com>; jbendor@omlaw.com; Dennis Wilenchik <diw@wb-
law.com>; Jack Wilenchik <JackW@wb-law.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>;
jim@bartonmendezsoto.com; Andrew Gaona <agaona@cblawyers.com>
Subject: Re: AEO designation

Thank you. We will email the entire Exhibit D by noon. However, given the Court's email, we may not be
able to file our joint stipulated motion prior to noon. I am drafting the motion now and will send it shortly
for your approval.
Jordan Wolff
Attorney
JordanW@wb-law.com

P 602‑606‑2810 | F 602‑606‑2811
www.wb-law.com
----------------------------
network system.
----------------------------
From: Roopali Desai <rdesai@cblawyers.com>

Cc: Barr, Daniel (Perkins Coie) <DBarr@perkinscoie.com>; jbendor@omlaw.com
<jbendor@omlaw.com>; Dennis Wilenchik <diw@wb-law.com>; Jack Wilenchik <JackW@wb-law.com>;
Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>; jim@bartonmendezsoto.com
<jim@bartonmendezsoto.com>; Andrew Gaona <agaona@cblawyers.com>
Subject: RE: AEO designation

Hi Jordan,

Thanks for your email. The Court just responded and indicated that it prefers a stipulated motion to
outline what you stated below. Plaintiffs ADP and Gallardo agree that only attorneys that have made
appearances will have access to and review Ex. D9 (the document marked AEO because it purportedly
contains sensitive security info). We also agree that you should email the entire Ex. D to us by 12 pm.
Thanks.

Regards,
Roopali

To: Roopali Desai <rdesai@cblawyers.com>
Cc: Barr, Daniel (Perkins Coie) <DBarr@perkinscoie.com>; jbendor@omlaw.com; Dennis Wilenchik
<diw@wb-law.com>; Jack Wilenchik <JackW@wb-law.com>; Kory Langhofer <kory@statecraftlaw.com>
Subject: Re: AEO designation

-External Sender-
Roopali,

Thank you for agreeing to the AEO designation. This is to confirm that only attorneys that have made an
appearance in CV2021-006646 will have access and review the documents marked AEO. Moreover, I
will only be sending counsel the documents via email and will not be refiling them with the Court. Exhibit
D has already been filed with Court under seal. I am under the impression that the Court will instruct the
Clerk of Court to release the documents that were previously filed under seal. You were included on the
p y
email to Judge Martin's JA requesting that the Court not release Exhibit D9 to the public. We have not
received a response.

As an alternative, we can file a joint stipulated motion to strike the previously filed Exhibit D from the
record and we can refile Exhibit D, not including any documents marked AEO, with the Court today.

Please let me know your thoughts on how you would like to proceed.

I am available for a quick call fi you would like to discuss further.
Jordan Wolff
Attorney
JordanW@wb-law.com

www.wb-law.com P 602‑606‑2810 | F 602‑606‑2811
----------------------------
network system.
----------------------------
From: Roopali Desai <rdesai@cblawyers.com>

Cc: Barr, Daniel (Perkins Coie) <DBarr@perkinscoie.com>; jbendor@omlaw.com
<jbendor@omlaw.com>
Subject: AEO designation

Jordan,

Counsel for Plaintiffs and Intervenors are fine with you filing all the documents with the Court (and
emailing us the filing), except the single document that you believe contains sensitive security
information, which you can mark “AEO” and send to counsel only for review. If we believe that some or
all of the “AEO” designated document should be filed with the Court, we will confer with you first and
then, if we cannot reach agreement, we can take it up with the Court. I think that resolves the issue you
called me about, but if I am missing something, please let me know. Thanks.

Regards,

Roopali H. Desai
Coppersmith Brockelman PLC

Office: 602.381.5478 | Fax: 602.224.6020

2800 N. Central Ave., Ste. 1900, Phoenix, AZ 85004
cblawyers.com | Facebook | LinkedIn

NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply
email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you.
EXHIBIT G

2021-04-30 Request For Emergency Status Conference Re The Court - S SUA Sponte Release of Exhibit D9 To The Public

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2021-04-30 Request For Emergency Status Conference Re The Court - S SUA Sponte Release of Exhibit D9 To The Public

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

From: Jordan Wolff <JordanW@wb-law.com>

The Wilenchik & Bartness Building

From: Irene Jones (SUP) <Irene.Jones@JBAZMC.Maricopa.Gov>

The Court is asking for an update on the stipulated motion.

From: Jordan Wolff <JordanW@wb-law.com>

The Wilenchik & Bartness Building

9 BARTON MENDEZ SOTO PLLC

10 /s/ James E. Barton (with permission)

From: Hilary Myers <HilaryM@wb-law.com>

The Wilenchik & Bartness Building

Cyber Ninjas Lodged Documents - Exhibits D9 and D10

Cyber Ninjas Lodged Documents - Exhibits D1-D8

4.28.2021 Minute Entry - Hearing

4.27.2021 Minute Entry - Hearing

SOS Notice of Joinder in Proposed Order Granting Prelim. Inj.

Plaintiffs' Notice of Lodging Proposed Prelim. Inj. Order

Cyber Ninjas Motion for Substitution of Counsel

Cyber Ninjas Emergency Motion for Continuance

Cyber Ninjas Credit Memo

4.23.2021 - Supreme Court Order

SOS Motion to Intervene - Part 2

SOS Motion to Intervene - Part 1

Cyber Ninjas Notice of Joinder

Plaintiffs' Notice of Filing of Declarations - Part 3

Plaintiffs' Notice of Filing of Declarations - Part 2

Plaintiffs' Notice of Filing of Declarations - Part 1

Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion for TRO - Part 2

Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion for TRO - Part 1

14% off 10%… 23%…

$329.37 $158.39 $149.31

NEWS  ARIZONA NEWS   

Cyber Ninjas security plan

Start Your Project In Minutes

By: Garrett Archer , Nicole Valdes

PHOENIX — Cyber Ninjas, the Florida company hired by Arizona Senate

In response to media requests, a Maricopa Superior Court judge ruled Wednesday

Recent Stories from abc15.com

B&H Photo Video

Man volunteers over 400 hours during

RELATED: Secretary of State gets observers inside Maricopa County

One major component of the plan is a threat assessment of security vulnerabilities

No such disruptions have occurred during the recount.

The document names the Arizona Rangers, a uniformed volunteer law

Cyber Ninja's lists Phoenix Law Enforcement Officers Association as providing at

Neither group is an official state, county or municipal law enforcement agency.

Easy as Drag, Drop, Done

The Arizona Senate-led hand recount is scheduled to continue until May 14 at

Sign up for the Headlines Newsletter and receive up to date information.

Texas 11-year-old faces in-school suspension for

From: Barr, Daniel (Perkins Coie) <DBarr@perkinscoie.com>

Daniel Barr | Perkins Coie LLP

From: Jordan Wolff <JordanW@wb-law.com>

The Wilenchik & Bartness Building

From: Roopali Desai <rdesai@cblawyers.com>

The Wilenchik & Bartness Building

From: Roopali Desai <rdesai@cblawyers.com>

Coppersmith Brockelman PLC

You might also like