Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CV-22-676147

DATE: 20220207

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: Path Network, Inc. and Marshall Webb

AND:

Imadullah Farooqui a.k.a. Tyler Samid a.k.a Imaad Farooqui, John Does, Jane Does and Doe Corporations

BEFORE: W.D. Black J.

COUNSEL: Norman Groot and Geoff Keeble, for the Plaintiffs

READ: February 4, 2022 (ex parte motion)

ENDORSEMENT

[1] This is an urgent ex parte motion in which the plaintiffs seek an Anton Pillar Order to allow them to seize and preserve evidence relevant to this case (discussed below), and related injunctive relief as against the defendant (“Farooqui”).

[2] Farooqui was an independent contractor with the plaintiff, Path Network, Inc. (Path Net), pursuant to an Independent Contractor Agreement (the “ICA”), executed by Farooqui on or about March 7, 2021. Prior to executing the ICA, Farooqui had leased certain server space from Path Net’s subsidiary, Tempest Hosting LLC (“Tempest”), and Farooqui continued to do so once he became an independent contractor with Path Net.

[3] Path Net is an online data hosting and data security company.

[4] By October of 2021, Path Net had concerns about Farooqui’s workplace attendance and specifically, that Farooqui was increasingly unavailable during his shifts and therefore not doing his share of required work.

[5] In investigating Farooqui’s attendance issues, Path Net discovered that Farooqui had been accessing and modifying his personal accounts with Tempest, delaying, reducing and in some cases deleting entirely, invoices that Farooqui was sent in connection with his leasing of server space from Tempest.

[6] As a result of discovering the manipulation of these invoices, Path Net suspended Farooqui’s servers with Tempest.

[7] When confronted with Path Net’s knowledge of his manipulation of the invoices, Farooqui admitted he had altered and deleted his invoices from Tempest using his Path Net employee authorization, and purported to justify having done so on the basis that he believed he was entitled to use Tempest servers for free as a Path Net contractor.

[8] Path Net’s representatives explained to Farooqui that this was not the case, and advised him that his Tempest servers were suspended and would remain suspended until Farooqui’s account with Tempest was settled.

[9] Farooqui responded that he would not pay his account with Tempest and that he quit.

[10] Within half an hour of this exchange, Path Net’s servers, systems and infrastructure were shut down. Path Net detected that sensitive customer data had been modified or deleted, that the firewall rules for Path Net and Tempest’s customers had been changed on their profiles to shut down all traffic to their websites, and that a critical dashboard had been deleted.

[11] Path Net’s evidence is that these systems and information were essential to the ordinary operation of Path Net’s business and that as a result of the loss of these systems, Path Net’s operations ceased.

[12] By virtue of the loss of the dashboard, Path Net also became defenceless to protect its customers from “hacks” by rogues.

[13] After taking steps to restore its systems and infrastructure to repair the damage done, Path Net was able to resume operations but the damages resulting from the attack on its systems and infrastructure is estimated to have cost Path Net several hundred thousand dollars, and the functionality of the restored systems is not at the level as before the attack.

[14] By way of an activity log search, Path Net personnel were able to determine that Farooqui was responsible for the shutdown; the commands to launch the attacks came from his IP address.

[15] A Path Net representative messaged Farooqui and accused him of causing the Path Net shutdown. In response, Farooqui did not deny having done so, but in fact purported to rationalize the attack as retaliation for Farooqui’s Tempest servers having been suspended. In a subsequent telephone call, Farooqui again confirmed that he was responsible for the attack.

[16] A few hours later, Farooqui began a campaign of spreading hateful and defamatory remarks to customers of Path Net, alleging that the Path Net representative who had texted and spoken with him as described in paragraph 15 above was a sexual predator of children.

[17] Farooqui also began “doxing” that Path Net representative and another Path Net representative, in other words, publishing on the internet their personal contact information (at the same time as circulating the “sexual predator” allegations).

[18] Farooqui proceeded to post similar information on his Instagram account and elsewhere and more recently, has escalated his campaign against Path Net and its personnel to incessant calls and death threats to Path Net staff members.

[19] There have been other related activities, but suffice to say that Path Net has considerable evidence of a vindictive campaign that Farooqui has undertaken against Path Net, its personnel, and its business, and is concerned to ensure that Farooqui’s campaign is stopped and does not escalate from threats to actual violence.

[20] In addition to the evidence summarized above regarding Farooqui’s activities, Path Net has provided evidence as to Farooqui’s likely current residence. Path Net is concerned, given the nature of Farooqui’s activities, that providing any notice to Farooqui of the relief Path Net seeks will lead to the destruction or relocation of evidence.

[21] I accept that the evidence presented by Path Net justifies resort to the rare remedy of an Anton Pillar Order and related injunctive relief and that no advance notice should be provided to Farooqui of the execution of the Orders.

[22] In the circumstances, I am prepared to grant both Orders sought by Path Net, in the terms of the Orders provided in Path Net’s materials.

W.D Black J.

Date: February 7, 2022