Vexatious litigant and extortionist Crystal Cox continues to lose her many looney legal battles. She filed a slew of similar lawsuits against a large group of people Cox thought were engaged in some grand conspiracy to deprive her of a right to earn a living. (Note: Her inability to earn a living is completely her own doing.) Those suits were all thrown out of court one by one.

The lawsuit in which Marc Randazza, his wife, and their young daughter are suing Crystal Cox for  cyberpiracy and cybersquatting remains alive, but Cox keeps getting slapped down. Most recently, her order demanding that the court force the FBI or an Attorney General to begin an investigation into Cox and Randazza was denied.

Crystal Cox’s motion to dismiss on the basis that the Randazzas have committed a “fraud on the court” was denied because it was filed “fatally late.” Despite being warned over and over that she must follow the court’s rules, Cox keeps filing looney motions which don’t follow the scheduling order and are unsubstantiated and incomprehensible. This time, the court warned her again, and told her that future violations of the court’s rules “may be met with monetary sanctions.”

Cox has still failed to file an appropriate answer to the Randazzas’ complaint. So the judge threw out most of Cox’s answer.

The most entertaining recent decision in the case is one that Crystal Cox has tried to spin as a win for herself. In reality, the decision deals several more blows to her. All claims Cox made against Randazza Legal Group were dismissed. Most of the claims she made against Marc Randazza were dismissed, with the exception of a defamation claim for statements made outside of litigation and a claim for legal malpractice. Most of the claims were dismissed with prejudice, meaning Cox cannot refile those claims. Two of the dismissed claims (abuse of process and tortious interference with business advantage) could be refiled by Cox, but she has no proof of either and cannot succeed on those claims. (Most notably, her claim of interference with business advantage blames the Randazzas for her inability to earn a living, when the truth is that her nutty behavior is the real reason she cannot get a job or develop a viable business.)

It is doubtful that Cox can refile any of her claims in a way that complies with the court’s rules. The circus continues…