'Prove Mike Wrong' challenger won't rest until he gets 'second bite of the apple' – even after SCOTUS spared MyPillow CEO – Image for illustrative purposes only (Image credits: Pixabay)
A software engineer who once claimed a $5 million prize from MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell’s election data challenge continues his legal push despite setbacks from federal courts. Robert Zeidman filed a motion in February seeking a rehearing before the original arbitration panel that initially ruled in his favor. This development arrives after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to intervene, leaving Lindell victorious in the appeals process. The case underscores persistent tensions around 2020 election claims and the fine points of contest rules.
The Origins of the “Prove Mike Wrong” Challenge
Mike Lindell launched his “Prove Mike Wrong” contest during a 2021 Cyber Symposium in South Dakota. He offered $5 million to anyone who could disprove his assertions that cyber data from the November 2020 election showed foreign interference, specifically from China. Lindell promised to supply packet captures and other evidence for challengers to examine. The event drew attention amid widespread scrutiny of election fraud allegations.
Robert Zeidman, a software developer and supporter of former President Donald Trump, entered the contest. He analyzed the provided data files and concluded they did not relate to the 2020 election. The arbitration panel agreed, awarding him the full prize amount. This initial victory highlighted vulnerabilities in the data Lindell presented.
Arbitration Ruling and District Court Backing
The three-member arbitration panel determined that Zeidman met the challenge criteria. They noted the files lacked packet capture data, or PCAP, which aligned with expectations set in Lindell’s promotional materials. Under the rules Zeidman signed, participants needed to prove the data did not reflect information from the November 2020 election. The panel’s decision rested on this analysis.
Senior U.S. District Judge John R. Tunheim upheld the award in February 2024. His ruling affirmed the arbitrators’ interpretation. At that stage, Lindell faced a clear financial obligation from the contest. Zeidman appeared poised to collect the prize after proving his case.
Appeals Court Overturns the Award
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed course later that year. Judges found the arbitration panel had strayed by considering promotional language outside the written rules. The rules themselves omitted any mention of packet captures, focusing instead on whether the data related to the election. Minnesota law, which governed the contract, prohibited such extrinsic evidence for unambiguous terms.
Partner offer
The appellate panel emphasized that the arbitrators had deemed the rules clear yet used external context anyway. This exceeded their authority, the court ruled. Lindell thus escaped the $5 million payout. The decision marked a significant win for him in this thread of his legal battles.
Supreme Court Denial Sparks New Motion
Zeidman petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the appeals decision. He argued for the validity of the “manifest disregard” standard to vacate arbitration awards. The justices denied certiorari about a month before Zeidman’s next filing. This left the 8th Circuit’s ruling intact.
What matters now: Zeidman’s rehearing bid tests whether the original panel can revisit its work without conflicting with higher court findings. Lindell’s team calls it futile, citing the appeals reversal on key evidence.
On February 13, Zeidman moved for a rehearing by the same arbitration panel. Court documents outlined his position in light of the federal rulings. He sought to reclaim his standing from the initial win. The motion arrived amid Lindell’s broader legal challenges unrelated to this contest.
Lindell’s Team Pushes to End the Case
Lindell Management LLC responded forcefully in an April 30 filing. Attorney Barbara Podlucky Berens argued Zeidman lacked a viable path to the prize. She contended any rehearing would repeat the error of imposing a packet data requirement not in the rules. The 8th Circuit’s logic defeated his claims outright, she wrote.
The filing portrayed the matter as resolved. Zeidman’s success hinged on the very interpretation federal courts rejected. Granting a rehearing would prove pointless, Lindell’s lawyers maintained. Judge Tunheim now holds the decision on whether to allow it.
- 2021: “Prove Mike Wrong” challenge at Cyber Symposium.
- Initial arbitration: Zeidman awarded $5 million.
- Feb 2024: District court upholds award.
- Later 2024: 8th Circuit reverses.
- Jan 2026: Supreme Court denies review.
- Feb 13, 2026: Zeidman files for rehearing.
- April 30, 2026: Lindell opposes.
This timeline captures the protracted nature of the dispute. Each step has narrowed Zeidman’s options while bolstering Lindell’s position.
The saga reflects how contest fine print can alter high-stakes outcomes. For Lindell, avoiding the payout preserves resources amid other pressures. Zeidman’s persistence signals unresolved questions about the challenge’s data. As the district court weighs the rehearing request, the full resolution remains pending, with implications for arbitration practices in similar disputes.
Partner offer
Planning a trip to Vegas?
Compare hotel rates and show tickets on VEGAS.com.
