Mike Lindell, the MyPillow CEO and prominent proponent of 2020 election fraud claims, scored a legal win this week after a federal appeals court overturned a $5 million arbitration award previously granted to a software engineer who challenged the veracity of Lindell’s data.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled Wednesday that Lindell Management LLC is no longer obligated to pay engineer Robert Zeidman, who had been declared the winner of Lindell’s 2021 “Prove Mike Wrong” challenge—a public offer made during a South Dakota symposium in which Lindell invited participants to disprove data he claimed showed Chinese interference in the 2020 U.S. election.
Zeidman, who supports Donald Trump but doubted Lindell’s evidence, analyzed the provided files and concluded they had nothing to do with the 2020 election. An arbitration panel later agreed and awarded him the $5 million prize, a decision later upheld by a Minnesota federal district court. But the Eighth Circuit has now vacated that judgment.
Court: “Rules Are Unambiguous”
The appellate court’s ruling centered on contract interpretation. Specifically, it found that the arbitration panel overstepped by relying on promotional materials and other external sources rather than the language of the official challenge rules themselves—something prohibited under Minnesota contract law when a contract is deemed unambiguous.
“The parties agreed that the Rules are unambiguous,” the Eighth Circuit wrote. “Minnesota law provides that, in interpreting unambiguous contracts, the intent of the parties must be determined from the language of the contract alone without resort to extrinsic evidence. We agree.”
The challenge rules Zeidman signed stipulated participants had to prove that data provided by Lindell did not relate to the November 2020 election. Zeidman argued that none of the files contained “packet capture” (PCAP) data—purported election hacking evidence—which Lindell had advertised would be included.
While the arbitrators agreed with Zeidman and declared him the winner, the court ruled they went too far by effectively narrowing the contract’s scope to only include PCAP data, even though the challenge rules made no such limitation.
Arbitration Panel Overstepped, Court Finds
The court found that the arbitration panel created a new standard by assuming only PCAP data could be considered valid “election-related information,” thereby altering the terms of the agreement.
“From the four corners of the Challenge contract… there is no way to read ‘information related to the November 2020 election’ as meaning only information that is ‘PCAP data,’” the court wrote. “The panel simply imposed its own conception of sound policy.”
The appeals court said the arbitrators exceeded their authority, both by redefining the contract terms and by ignoring Minnesota’s prohibition on using outside evidence to interpret clear contractual language.
What Comes Next
While the ruling represents a major victory for Lindell, the case isn’t fully closed. The appeals court sent the matter back to the district court with two options: either formally vacate the arbitration award in Lindell’s favor or conduct further proceedings consistent with the appellate opinion.
For now, Zeidman’s $5 million award has been invalidated, underscoring the legal importance of sticking strictly to contract terms—regardless of what was advertised or promised outside the fine print.
Mike Lindell, seen at multiple rallies in support of Donald Trump and vocal in his push to overturn the 2020 election results, has faced mounting legal troubles over his claims. This latest ruling gives him a reprieve in one of several ongoing legal battles.
