From what I've gathered reading Popehat's coverage over the past hour: * The attorneys had previously brought a John Doe suit trying to identify an alleged cop

From what I've gathered reading Popehat's coverage over the past hour: * The attorneys had previously brought a John Doe suit trying to identify an alleged copyright infringer. * The defending attorney brought it to the Judge's attention that the plaintiff was deliberately obfuscating the actual parties of interest in the suit against Federal court rules and that there were other shenanigans going on, e.g., the alleged CEO of one of the holding companies says he has nothing to do with the company and his identity was stolen by one of the attorneys for use in the suits they were bringing. * The Judge has been looking into the matter and is strongly inclined to believe that those claims are true. * The Judge had previously ordered these attorneys to show up and explain themselves on March 11. They blew off the court order and didn't show. * They did show up this time, but were unwilling to answer any of the Judge's questions. * The Judge will now decide whether he should levy administrative sanctions against these attorneys and whether he'll refer the case to the US Attorney for investigation into possible criminal conduct. So -- and I'm not a lawyer -- if I'm understanding this correctly, it's less that the Judge is taking this as evidence of guilt so much as they haven't taken advantage of either of the opportunities he's given them to explain the evidence he's seen that they've engaged in misconduct.