As the article mentions, the paperwork error appears to have been a mistake, not an intentional effort to skirt the law. Mistakes happen. The only sketchy part about it was the attempt to add additional items to the seizure request retroactively. However, it is very unlikely any of those items had any relevance to the actual case. A lot of personal property was seized (cars, etc.). That's most likely the type of stuff they are talking about. I find it more than unlikely that the original warrant didn't include the servers which are the actual point of the whole case.