Georgia-based software firm Ebix Inc. asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed against it by its ousted former CEO, who alleged the company's director tried to blackmail him into dropping a suit over his severance pay by threatening to release "intimate images" of him and his wife.

In its Monday dismissal motion, Ebix says Robin Raina's allegations about Vikas Garg, the head of Indian firm Eraaya Lifespaces Ltd., which acquired Ebix last year, were "false and defamatory." Ebix says that accusing a company and its director of threatening to release "intimate images" is serious and should be backed up by facts, but the company contends there are no such facts in Raina's case.

"Ebix — including the director wrongly accused of these allegations — has no knowledge of any alleged intimate depictions of Mr. Raina, has not threatened to disclose them, and has no interest in disclosing them even if they exist and are somehow in Ebix's possession," the company states.

Even if that weren't true, however, Ebix says, Raina's suit must be tossed because 15 U.S.C. Section 6851 — which allows those whose intimate images are disclosed without their consent to bring a civil action — only applies to "actual, past disclosures of 'intimate visual depictions,'" not to "threatened violations, or possible future violations, or because someone 'suspects' there might have been a violation."

Ebix argues the latter is exactly what is at play in Raina's case.

Though Raina claims Garg threatened on a phone call to release explicit images of Raina and his wife that were stored on a hard drive Garg improperly obtained, the company says the lawsuit contains "threadbare and conclusory allegations that there has been a disclosure, based only on 'information and belief.'" It contains "no meaningful details," the company argues, not even what specifically was disclosed, when or how it was disclosed or who allegedly saw it.

That is a problem, Ebix argues, when it could not identify "a single case" in which a court found a violation of Section 6851 based on just a threat to disclose intimate images.

The company acknowledges that Raina amended his complaint earlier this month and that his claim is "no longer styled as a violation of [Section] 6851 but rather (supposedly) just a claim for injunctive relief," but it argues that a "mere retitling of the cause of action" does not "magically transform" it into something different.

"The holes remain: there is still no allegation that the Ebix director mentioned any intimate visual depictions on the call, or actually threatened to disclose any such intimate visual depictions," Ebix says.

In fact, Ebix contends that any mention from Garg about a hard drive "could have been (and likely was)" a reference to Eraaya's separate litigation against Raina for alleged financial crimes and corporate misconduct.

Raina's claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, conversion and violations of the Georgia RICO Act must also be dismissed, the company argues, because they are state law claims over which the federal court only has supplemental jurisdiction.

"There is no reason" for the court to continue exercising jurisdiction over the state law claims because Raina already has ongoing litigation against Ebix in Georgia's Fulton County Superior Court, Ebix argues.

Raina's lawsuit against Ebix came nearly two years after the company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in Texas. In a proceeding that saw the company sell off its life insurance business to the tune of about $386 million, Ebix was ultimately acquired by Eraaya last year.

Shortly after exiting bankruptcy, the company announced last September that it was suspending Raina amid accusations of forged documents, financial improprieties and intimidation of employees, according to Raina, who said the charges were unfounded. Raina was then removed from the company the following month.

He then filed suit against the company in state court, claiming it refused to pay him a multimillion dollar severance package and libeled him in a series of statements accusing him of misconduct. The federal suit came later, with Raina accusing Garg and another Ebix employee of attempting to strong-arm him into dropping the state court case. As part of that, Raina claims Garg came into possession of a hard drive containing intimate pictures of him and his wife.

Raina has asked the court for, at minimum, statutory damages of $150,000.

The parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Tuesday.

Raina is represented by Lucas W. Andrews, Samantha R. Mandell and Ashley Futrell Hinkson of Stanton Law LLC.

Ebix is represented by Joshua F. Alloy and Mohamed Al-Hendy of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, and Jordan A. Fishman and John Hunt of Stokes Wagner ALC.

The case is Raina v. Ebix Inc., case number 1:25-cv-05033, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.