D
Deleted member 10469
Guest
Hi, good luck to you 
California Case Update
- Thread starter Shamil
- Start date
- Status
Member 3639
Active member
@shelly
A bit touchy aren't we dear? Was supposed to be a joke to be taken lightly.
My point was all updates are posted in the sticky thread for the exact purpose of updating people. That thread was created for a reason you know
.
So before I move along...try looking first
A bit touchy aren't we dear? Was supposed to be a joke to be taken lightly.
My point was all updates are posted in the sticky thread for the exact purpose of updating people. That thread was created for a reason you know
.So before I move along...try looking first
Hm I do not really see greediness as the problem here, IB could be greedy and still support fair competition. In fact greediness drives business as long as the customer and competition are treated fairly. I hope justice prevails over dishonesty though.
ENF
Well-known member
PACER Updates for: 11/26/2012
Documents in this pack:
#150 - Proposed Order [Court Date: December 17, 2012 @ 10:00 AM]
#151 - Motion to Object Striking Mike Sullivan's Answers to SAC (8 Pages)
#151-1 - Declaration (37 Pages)
[Requested to merged]
Note: There were previous documents issued that I didn't report due to the insignificance. However, I' have included them here for completeness.
Previous Documents: (11/15/2012)
#148 - Notice (Attorney Vacation)
#149 - Revised/Corrected Joint Exhibit List
Docket Text #150 said:
Docket Text #151 said:
Documents in this pack:
#150 - Proposed Order [Court Date: December 17, 2012 @ 10:00 AM]
#151 - Motion to Object Striking Mike Sullivan's Answers to SAC (8 Pages)
#151-1 - Declaration (37 Pages)
[Requested to merged]
Note: There were previous documents issued that I didn't report due to the insignificance. However, I' have included them here for completeness.
Previous Documents: (11/15/2012)
#148 - Notice (Attorney Vacation)
#149 - Revised/Corrected Joint Exhibit List
ENF
Well-known member
PACER updates for: 11/26/2012 [Additional]
Documents in this pack:
#152 - Final Pre-trial Conference (Proposed)
#152-1* - Proposed Order Final Pre-Trial Conference Order [Not attached due to size]
* 152-1 said it was created with a newer version of Adobe Acrobat. This file is also missing the usual header marker. (related?)
Docket Text #152 said:
Documents in this pack:
#152 - Final Pre-trial Conference (Proposed)
#152-1* - Proposed Order Final Pre-Trial Conference Order [Not attached due to size]
* 152-1 said it was created with a newer version of Adobe Acrobat. This file is also missing the usual header marker. (related?)
Jake Bunce
Well-known member
ENF
Well-known member
There is no signed version - which is why I didn't comment on the outcome directly.
I don't see any record of the 11/26 hearing itself, there are no minutes or transcripts filed related to the hearing that happened on Monday.
Updates for Monday's case records has closed, so I can't tell you anymore until more updates are added.
The only record of the 11/26 hearing is this proposed order.
(IMHO: The points were ARGUED but not formally decided on by the judge)
V
vVv
Guest
well today is Monday lol.. hopefully some stuff is posted again, but I'm still confused as to what all happened though. i haven't read any of those DOCs, because I'm obviously not law jargon smart lol. 
new hearing Dec something.. its looking good in XF's favor.. short n sweet right? Might see an end to all this SOONER than we think? lol
new hearing Dec something.. its looking good in XF's favor.. short n sweet right? Might see an end to all this SOONER than we think? lol
Digital Doctor
Well-known member
Matt Meecham (IPB) and David_ (vBulletinsucks.com).
ENF
Well-known member
well today is Monday lol.. hopefully some stuff is posted again, but I'm still confused as to what all happened though. i haven't read any of those DOCs, because I'm obviously not law jargon smart lol.
Well, the 'business day' Monday has closed for the U.S. West Coast. Therefore, no more updates for the next 24 hours, at least.
Essentially, what I think happened is that the legal teams argued their cases in front of the judge. The judge has yet to rule on the motions that are currently on the table. The attorneys for XF filed a 'proposed' order that sounds like a win for XF as long as the judge agrees and signs it. A signed order would be entered once this part was complete.
I'm surprised that Kier or someone from XF doesn't already have a direct answer from their legal team that could answer this more clearly.
Jake Bunce
Well-known member
Most likely yes. The order doesn't specifically name Matt Mecham, but extended discovery was denied which IB requested in part so it could depose and subpoena him. So one would assume that Matt Mecham is out of it now that IB was denied additional discovery. Though the copy of the order that was posted in this thread isn't signed. I assume the proposed order was signed since it was drafted today. Still waiting for certainty on that though.
V
vVv
Guest
Well, the 'business day' Monday has closed for the U.S. West Coast. Therefore, no more updates for the next 24 hours, at least.
Essentially, what I think happened is that the legal teams argued their cases in front of the judge. The judge has yet to rule on the motions that are currently on the table. The attorneys for XF filed a 'proposed' order that sounds like a win for XF as long as the judge agrees and signs it. A signed order would be entered once this part was complete.
I'm surprised that Kier or someone from XF doesn't already have a direct answer from their legal team that could answer this more clearly.
ah okay.. and thanks for clarification, hopefully this is over soon!!
Deepmartini
Well-known member
I don't understand. So what does this all mean? There is still a trial in January? Basically, I just want to know if Xenforo is likely to still be around before I put anymore time into building a forum on their platform then get stuck with borked software.
- Status