California Case Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
With a generalized statement, I'm still kind of fuzzing, sorry. Does that mean that they are claiming that xF has stolen vB code thus copyright infringement?
 
AzzidReign said:
With a generalized statement, I'm still kind of fuzzing, sorry. Does that mean that they are claiming that xF has stolen vB code thus copyright infringement?
Click to expand...
That was always the original complaint I think.

What's happening now is, if I'm reading it right, that there was a change in some law (I'm assuming in California) and IB is now asking if the 7th and 8th complaints there were dropped from the case can be brought back. They were denied having the 7th brought back in but were granted the 8th, as well as allowed to add their second amended complaint.

Man, if I got that incorrect will someone correct me? I tried. :confused:

Either way it sounds more like yet another stall tactic to keep the case from actually seeing a court date and there's still no solid evidence being brought in from IB's side.
 
Shamil said:
This just showed up, maybe PACER's being slow.

PROCEEDINGS: Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of order dismissing 7th & 8th claims of 1st amended complaint with prejudice based on a change in the law; Motion for leave to file a 2nd amended
complaint to add new claims and defendants based on newly discovered evidence (fld 9-5-11)
The parties submit on their papers as filed.
The Court GRANTS plaintiff’s motion as to the 7th cause of action, and DENIES plaintiff’s motion as to the 8th cause of action, and GRANTS plaintiff’s motion to file a 2nd amended complaint.
Plaintiff shall submit a proposed order.

PROCEEDINGS: MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS)

None

Due to this Court’s ruling on October 17, 2011 Granting in
Part Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration, and Granting Plaintiff Leave to File an Amended Complaint, the Court
NOW VACATES the dates of the Final Pre-Trial Conference
of October 24, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. and Jury Trial of November 29, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. The Court will re-set the dates for the pre- trial conference and trial at a later date following the filing
of the amended complaint and whatever further litigation follows that filing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Click to expand...

A refresher... 7th and 8th Claims were ?
 
Even PACER has issues...

Internal Server Error

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, root@localhost and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
Apache Server at ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov Port 443
 
Shamil said:
Even PACER has issues...

Internal Server Error

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, root@localhost and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
Apache Server at ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov Port 443
Click to expand...
I'm surprised that error message is not in lawyer lingo. :D

"Due to an internal error encountered on October 22, 2011, the server was unable to complete the request made by the visiting plaintiff / defendant.
Please contact the higher court and inform them fully, under oath, of the time the action in question occurred, and anything else you may have done that may have caused such unpardonable consequences.
IT IS SO ORDERED."

I'm sure someone else could do a better job at that. :p
 
Both PACER and Case Management Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) make life so much easier...though many on here have become familiar with PACER through this case, the ECF function is a better component; it sends a copy of all documents to all parties via email whenever they are filed (done, of course, via uploading a .pdf copy of the document). So, this going back and checking on PACER is not necessary if you are a party and your case is an ECF (which, almost all cases are these days). It also makes it much easier to work remotely.

Now that I think of it, it would be interesting to see how the ECF attachment manager works.
 
I should note that both PACER and ECF was down. ECF and PACER and online. CM/ECF = sweet, and something we don't have in the UK, which we should really have.
 
I'm curious to see when this alleged filing of the second amended complaint will occur, and how that will end up delaying the trial. At this rate, Kier's child will be graduating from high school before this gets to trial.
 
honestly, anyone who have watched the Have You Seen videos by now, will figure that Kier+Mike have no need in stealing anyones code or copyright.
Those 2 guys are simply much faster by creating their own code and concepts than it would take to copy&paste some outdated code.

Their ability is in their brain, in their talent and their focus on the customer.
 
Don't you think Internet Brands is monitoring this thread and we're just poking the hornet's nest? Probably better to let them make fools of themselves on their own and go out of business--because they're their best form of advertising!
 
Contrary to popular belief, all advertising is not good advertising... this is not helping IB, and its not about poking the hornets nest, but more about them understanding the backlash they have created for themselves, whilst they struggle to understand the concept of customer relationships and its importance in business, still paying lip service to the concept that is the foundation of business itself.
 
Deepmartini said:
Don't you think Internet Brands is monitoring this thread and we're just poking the hornet's nest? Probably better to let them make fools of themselves on their own and go out of business--because they're their best form of advertising!
Click to expand...
I'm sure some intern is reading this thread but who cares? With regard to IB going out of business, doubtful. They will continue to milk the cow as long as possible and the product may die out but it's not really of issue to them. I'm far more concerned about my business and using XF and seeing it flourish than I am concerned about them.

Just as an FYI since this seems to be of interest, in general from my experience, companies with questionable or predatory practices prioritize prolonging their cash flow. They promise one thing today and later change their position to the detriment of the customer. When the customers complain they deny liability with technical loopholes, if any. At some point they may put up a brick wall, anticipating that customers will eventually become exhausted by their efforts. The ways when these practices come to an end are either (a) the customers persistent complaints significantly damage sales efforts, (b) the dollar value of a class action lawsuit becomes attractive to a law firm or (c) sufficient consumer complaints are received by a state attorney general who decides to investigate.
 
Deepmartini said:
Don't you think Internet Brands is monitoring this thread and we're just poking the hornet's nest? Probably better to let them make fools of themselves on their own and go out of business--because they're their best form of advertising!
Click to expand...
All that shows is that XF doesn't throw its content into a "Licensed Customer Feedback" forum so only licensed customers can see/comment :cool:
 
Summons Issued
Amended Complaint

Files not on PACER, events noted.

And yes, I'm just writing a response to those who have contacted me recently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom