California Case Update
- Thread starter Shamil
- Start date
- Status
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
<body><p><p>
<p>We need not even hope for winners and losers. Truth will out is enough.
Fred Sherman
Well-known member
<body><p><p>
<p>I can't help but notice the html tags in my posts. Didn't happen on Windows/IE9. Something new now that I'm on an iMac and Safari? Help?
Carlos
Well-known member
Its quite all right.
SchmitzIT
Well-known member
Classy lawyers IB employs. They receive a request to postpone to give XF Ltd adequate time to respond to their documents and statements that took months to compile, and the lawyers cannot even be arsed to reply. IB and their lawyers are a nice match for one another.
Nick
Well-known member
Could you perhaps list the documents in the first post by date so that we can easily identify which are the "new" ones?
Forsaken
Well-known member
Would still be useful to have the date.
Digital Doctor
Well-known member
Looks like May 16, 2011 is delayed until June 6, 2011.
A request made on behalf of the Defendants and granted by the Plantiff.
A request made on behalf of the Defendants and granted by the Plantiff.
Onimua
Well-known member
Thanks, that's very helpful!Notice on Filings: first post updated with dates and filing descriptions. Dates are as files and not necessarily as entered onto PACER.
Large document containing all files current to be published soon. Useful for iPad
Notice 2: Structure updated.
No problem.
For those who like to keep everything in one file, as I, especially for viewing on a portable device, such as an iPad, I'll be posting a big PDF file of everything currently there. It includes the docket report.
Here we go:
http://ge.tt/5V07IDw?c
For those who like to keep everything in one file, as I, especially for viewing on a portable device, such as an iPad, I'll be posting a big PDF file of everything currently there. It includes the docket report.
Here we go:
http://ge.tt/5V07IDw?c
AnthonyCea
Well-known member
Just tell us when this crap is over man, every little detail is starting to bore the hell out of me at this point, maybe some of you can distill it down for us and provide a summary so we don't have to read through hundreds of pages !!
I know the publishing company that filed suit against me was full of it when they tried to collect twice, they double billed me and put that amount in the suit (2 invoices billed) for a service they never fully rendered, I contested (or answered) every motion for about a year and a half, they got tired and dropped the case after I started making a counter claim (counter lawsuit), I do think that will happen with this one soon also.
I know the publishing company that filed suit against me was full of it when they tried to collect twice, they double billed me and put that amount in the suit (2 invoices billed) for a service they never fully rendered, I contested (or answered) every motion for about a year and a half, they got tired and dropped the case after I started making a counter claim (counter lawsuit), I do think that will happen with this one soon also.
x4rl
Well-known member
There is more than you interested in this case... I for one enjoy reading all the as you say "little details"
Carry on Shamil good job
AnthonyCea
Well-known member
Like I said, summaries would be nice from members who take the time to read the documents, I think that is a better approach than just posting links to PDF's, it would also make this thread more interesting to the readers.
- Status