NIAC Lost Defamation Case and Sanctioned for Discovery Abuses


arash Irandoost
by arash Irandoost

Hassan Daioleslam's statement

U.S. District Judge Bates dismissed NIAC’s defamation  lawsuit  against me. He also sanctioned NIAC for discovery abuses and they are ordered to pay significant part of my legal expenses. During my deposition and in the motions for summary  judgment, I reiterated what I have always believed that NIAC and Trita Parsi lobby for the Iranian regime


Today, after 4.5 years of legal battle, U.S. District Judge John Bates in Washington DC dismissed Trita Parsi and NIAC’s  complaints against me. Their complaints challenged my articles and reports that Trita Parsi and NIAC lobby for the Iranian regime and their interest in the US.  

In his decision, judge Bates wrote: "Defendant's motion for summary judgment will be granted, and all counts of plaintiffs' complaint will be dismissed."

Responding to our second motion to sanction NIAC and Parsi for their discovery abuses, judge accepted 7 of our 8 requests and sanctioned NIAC and ordered them to pay significant portion of the my legal expenses. (Judge's decision to sanction NIAC for discovery abuses)

I have always believed that NIAC and Trita Parsi lobby for the Iranian regime.   I maintained and reiterated this belief during the lawsuit, my deposition and in our last motions including the motion for summary  judgment.

Hassan Daioleslam

September 13, 2012

Excerpts from judge's decision to grant summary judgment:

Nonetheless, virtually nothing in the truncated record relied on by the parties supports the proposition that defendant avoided his editors' questions and willfully avoided learning the truth. To the contrary, the record suggests that defendant and his editors were careful to substantiate his articles and that defendant engaged with those who questioned him. (P.14)

That Parsi occasionally made statements reflecting a balanced, sharedblame approach is not inconsistent with the idea that he was first and foremost an advocate for the regime. Given the other evidence defendant amassed to support his views, the Court sees no "actual malice" in defendant's decision to disregard occasional contrary statements and assume that they were made largely to burnish Parsi and NIAC's image in the United States. After all, any moderately intelligent agent for the Iranian regime would not want to be seen as unremittingly pro-regime, given the regime’s reputation in the United States. (p. 12)

The Court disagrees. While Parsi does criticize Iran's human rights record in the underlying article, his criticisms are tepid. A representative example is the following statement: "Even in long isolated Iran, a country known for its less than flattering Human Rights record, there is a trend toward the improvement of the human rights situation, although it remains far from being satisfactory."6 In this article Parsi does not come close to specifically condemning – or even mentioning – the "torture, mass executions, rapes of women in prison, and stoning" that defendant accuses him of ignoring. Moreover, the vast majority of the article is devoted to Parsi expressing his disappointment with the UCLA students who protested Kharazi's speech, not to discussing the regime's abuses. Hence, while defendant's article is certainly a strongly-worded and one-sided take on Parsi's underlying publication, it is not a distortion of the underlying publication that amounts to willful blindness or actual malice. (p. 13)

In sum, none of the communications from editors or other journalists provide any evidence that defendant had subjective doubts about his articles or willfully avoided the truth. (p.19)

What plaintiffs have overlooked is the possibility that defendant wants to discredit Parsi and "attack[] the whole web" because he genuinely believes that Parsi and his associates are advocating for or on behalf of a regime that he strongly opposes. That possibility is, in the Court's view, much more plausible than the idea that defendant's personal dislike of Parsi has motivated him to concoct dozens of elaborate articles discussing Parsi and the Iranian regime. (p.20)

Excerpts from Judge's decision to sanction NIAC for discovery abuses

Here, for instance, defendant has succeeded in obtaining partial fee-shifting for the PwC imaging. This fee-shifting is based on plaintiffs' discovery abuses, and defendant should not have to bear the costs of bringing those abuses to the attention of the Court. (p. 6)

Defendant has subpoenaed emails to or from NIAC employees from a number of third parties. Most of these emails are to or from NIAC employees in 2008 or 2009, and none were produced by NIAC But plaintiffs' failure to produce the other five categories of emails is indefensible, and plaintiffs made no coherent attempt to explain either in their briefing or at the motions hearing why all of these emails would not have been produced. Hrg. Tr. at 59. Most disturbingly, plaintiffs apparently gathered emails for their experts that they failed to produce to defendant, which clearly shows that plaintiffs' statement at the motions hearing that "[t]here may be technical explanations" for the failure to produce these documents is untrue. Given plaintiffs' inexplicable and unexplained behavior, it is appropriate to require them to pay the cost of serving the subpoenas (other than the subpoena to the Children of Persia employees) and the costs of bringing this portion of the instant motion. (p. 17-18)

the Court is troubled by the fact that it may be awarding sanctions based on conduct for which there is an innocent explanation that plaintiffs have simply failed to give. But plaintiffs have had more than sufficient opportunity to oppose the very clear claims in defendant's sanctions motion, and the Court cannot perpetually excuse their failure to do so. Because it seems quite clear that Parsi's interrogatory responses misrepresented when he had used the desktop – and because Parsi has never managed to explain what computer he was using during that time – some sanction is warranted.... Nonetheless, the Court believes that awarding the cost of this portion of the sanctions motion is appropriate here. In awarding sanctions, the Court is mindful not just of the need to compensate defendant, but also of the need to deter plaintiffs from future discovery abuses. (p. 22-23)

There is no question that plaintiffs have repeatedly tried to evade their discovery obligations, (p.23)

Plaintiffs must pay 60% of the expenses associated with bringing the instant motion. In addition, plaintiffs must pay for the last  wo rounds of PwC imaging; the expenses involved in bringing [112] defendant’s motion tocompel production of NIAC’s server; one-half of the expenses of Talebi’s deposition; the expenses associated with obtaining [93] the March 29, 2011 order relating to the Talebi emails; the expenses of serving the third-party subpoenas; the expenses involved in bringing [113] defendant’s motion to compel production of Salesforce data and membership lists; one-half of the expenses of the last half day of Parsi’s deposition; and one-half of the expenses of the second day of Blout’s deposition. (p. 25-26)

Hassan Daioleslam reaffirmed his belief that Parsi and NIAC lobby for the Iranian regime

Hassan Daioleslam's " Reply to Opp to Motion to Dismiss", granted  by the judge:

The Defendant properly pled and supported his allegation that he believes that his analysis of the Plaintiffs’ position is accurate. See Def. Motion to Dismiss, pp. 19-27; Afft. of Defendant at ¶¶ 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, and 13

Daioleslam's Motion to dismiss

B. All defendandt's Statements Are Substantially True (p.9)

The statements complained of regarding Parsi and NIAC’s lobbying activity are substantially true. Defendant has opined that Plaintiffs are important players in a lobby enterprise, lobbying on behalf of actions which are in line with the wishes and interests of the Iranian government. 10

It is true that the manner in which NIAC, and by extension Plaintiff Parsi as the President of NIAC seeks to have such legislators vote is in accord with the needs, interests and wishes of

the Iranian regime. (p. 10-11)

The Plaintiffs have not met their burden to show that the alleged defamatory statements

are untrue, (p. 13)

excerpts from Daioleslam's deposition quoted by Judge Bates in his decision

Questioned by Parsi's lawyer:

Q: Do you consider Dr. Parsi to be a political activist?

A. I think so.

Q: Do you consider him to be part of the Iranian regime?

A: I believe that he has worked, he has lobbied in favor of the Iranian regime.

Q: So based upon your prior testimony it would be fair to say that you believe because he is a part of the Iranian regime that you have no obligation to verify the truth of the statement that you make about him?

A: My belief is that of course I would prefer to go to Mr. Parsi and NIAC and ask for help and clarification about what I thought in 2006 when I was working to investigate about them for many questions I had. The thing is that honestly I did not expect the truth from them. Mostly because I thought the first aspect of their work was deception and lie. . . . I mean that mistrust was so that I believed and I still believe for the relation and trust that existed between Mr. Parsi and the inner circle of the Iranian regime.

(Pls.' Opp., Ex. E at 35-36.)


more from arash Irandoost

Nonsense ... just a few dollars spent on an obscure court case

by MaryamJoon on

NIAC's position is anti-Sanctions ... it hasn't changed.  

Open letter to Arash Irandoost, Ken Timmerman, Hassan Dai, & PDMI 


I love this judge...He has

by vildemose on

I love this judge...He has a great sense of humor.

This ruling gives others a chance to sue Niac/trita for misleading and mischaracterizing his entire organization...I hope this ruling provides encouragment for those who have time and resources do a thorough criminal/civil investigation of this shady organization soon.

Excellent legal precedent establisehd by this judge against Niacies... Bravo.

All Oppression Creates a State of War--Simone De Beauvoir


My favourite part of Judge's statement:

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

"After all, any moderately intelligent agent for the Iranian regime would not want to be seen as unremittingly pro-regime, given the regime’s reputation in the United States. (p. 12)"

Cant' stop laughing. Just priceless :)

Thank You Mr Irandoost far sharing. 


Brilliant Idea Soosan Khanoom!

by Faramarz on


Despite what they say about you, you actually can come up with some great ideas!

Let's turn NIAC's office in DC into an Iranian Hooters Restaurant with Kabab, Sharaab and Saaghi and Saaghar!


Shazde Jaan

by Faramarz on



You are officially in charge of the rehabilitation activities at Camp NIAC!


Soosan Khanoom

Imam Zaman jan some commentators here are just pro boobs

by Soosan Khanoom on

Their ideal Iranian American organization is a Hooter restaurant under an Iranian American management ...LOL  Don't take Shazdeh or Faramraz too seriously.

But the actual gang who are after Trita are the real pro war and pro Meks and they do anything to achieve their ill intentions.  


Iranian people are the biggest losers in this case!

by fanoos on

After thirty four years, one million Iranians in America just discovered that the very organization (NIAC) that was supposed to defend them and look after their rights and interests in this country actually turned out to be proven in the Court NOT doing so and rather going in the opposite direction! Now what? Where should Iranians go, back to square one? As Iranian-American, we should all feel ashamed and violated!


Shazde Asdola Mirza

با توجه به حساسیت پوستی‌ به ریش و پشم

Shazde Asdola Mirza

I only am able to support some of them hairless NIAC interns.


Help Save NIAC Interns!

by Faramarz on



I believe that the Iranian-American community should join hands and welcome the NIAC interns who unknowingly were misled into believing that NIAC actually represented us back to our community.

We Iranian-Americans believe in the "second chance" which is a part of the "American way" and will embrace the interns with open arms.

Trita and the gang just might as well move to Jamaran or someplace like that!



So Embarassing for NIAC and Trita

by seannewyork on

They claimed victory but lost.  Horrible reputation in the Iranian community.  Those poor people working at NIAC who dont know they are being used.

NIAC doest not represent anyone except the rapists in Iran. Knowingly or unkowingly.

 Regime change by the people of Iran.


God bless justice & its defenders including Israelis & Iranians!


The vindication of Mr. Dai in particular and Iranian people in general by this lawsuit brought upon by Trita Parsi and NIAC calls for celebration and three toasts to life for Mr. Dai in Hebrew!




Shlomo supports justice!

Imam-e Zaman

What Strane bedfellows!

by Imam-e Zaman on

It seems that pro Israel, pro MKO elements here have a field day here. What steange bedfellows!

Shazde Asdola Mirza

"Trita Parsi was first and foremost an advocate for the regime"

by Shazde Asdola Mirza on

It is official now ... court sanctioned too!

"After all, any moderately intelligent agent for the Iranian regime would not want to be seen as unremittingly pro-regime, given the regime’s reputation in the United States."

Oon Yaroo

Dear Arash Irandoost!

by Oon Yaroo on

I examined your article from top to bottom and found no evidence that would support a) you are Jew, b) you are pro-Israel, and c) you are useless to Iran!

Please keep on exposing pro-IRR/anti-Iranian elements and organizations around the world the right way using the due process as was done in this case!

God bless!




You're a pro Israeli Jew ... you and NIAC are useless to Iran.

by MaryamJoon on

Find a new hobby.

Free Palestine