California Case Update

Status
Not open for further replies.
I prefer the PDF's but perhaps that is because I get the gist of them. =p

That said, latest documents state:
- Both lawyers talked
- IB's lawyers were okay with Xenforo pushing the date to May 16 but would rather push it out further to June
- XF's lawyers were like awesome, let me check with the XF guys but they should be good too.

I'm putting a 60% chance on this being settled out of court before the June court date arrives.
 
Digital Doctor said:
Looks like May 16, 2011 is delayed until June 6, 2011.
A request made on behalf of the Defendants and granted by the Plantiff.
:(
Click to expand...

That's a good thing, though. XF's legal team asked for extra time so they can better respond to the "expert witness" presented by IB.

Considering the full source code has now been presented, I'd be very surprised if it won't become blatantly obvious that the claims of stolen code and copyright infringements for technology used all over the web are plain lies.

Oh, and I don't mind the PDFs at all :)
 
Reeve of Shinra said:
I prefer the PDF's but perhaps that is because I get the gist of them. =p

That said, latest documents state:
- Both lawyers talked
- IB's lawyers were okay with Xenforo pushing the date to May 16 but would rather push it out further to June
- XF's lawyers were like awesome, let me check with the XF guys but they should be good too.

I'm putting a 60% chance on this being settled out of court before the June court date arrives.
Click to expand...

No out-of-court deal. If xenForo wins, this slaps IB in-the-face for life!
 
Bottom line up front, this is just a request for an extension of time.

Ex Parte essentially means speaking/communicating with the court without the input/presence of the other party. The rules of professional conduct prohibit only one side from communicating with the judge without the other party. This is designed to preserve impartiality of the court and to keep one side from claiming that they did not have an opportunity to present their views to the court.

Different courts handle this issue differently. Some just require you to state if the other party consents to a motion, state what steps you have made to communicate with the other party, or if this was not possible due to circumstances (being on a weekend, after hours, last minute, etc.). The style issue of titling the filings as "Ex Parte" aside, I tend to think this is an odd practice, because the reality is that the court's electronic filing system automatically sends notice to all parties and the court. So, it seems not to really be Ex Parte. But, it is probably a nod to tradition and a matter of local practice.

I have to say, while not a big issue, it appears that the attorneys are throwing little digs at each other. Some judges don't like it when the attorneys don't "play well together." Other courts don't care. The point is that judges generally prefer parties to work minor issues out between each other and dislike having to get involved with the minutia. I don't know what the bar is like in this court. In some jurisdictions, it is like open warfare between plaintiff and defense bars. I have no idea how Judge Real views this and further have no idea if he would be irked at either side. It just seems like there is some minor posturing going on. Can't say that I have not seen this many times. Just something that caught my eye.
 
jadmperry said:
I have to say, while not a big issue, it appears that the attorneys are throwing little digs at each other.
Click to expand...

I noticed the same. It's prolly like the very beginning of a boxing match where the fighters throw a few punches at one another. Not meant to cause any real damage, but purely meant to explore how the other side's reflexes are.
 
Yeah, but it can tend to show poor form. It is generally annoying to quote e-mails and communications between the attorneys. Again, not a huge deal, but it is kinda like showing your ass to the court. Generally, better to take the high road. That said, can't say that I have not ever been very annoyed by another attorney. Or that I have not thrown digs. But, it is not the finest way to present yourself. The other thing is that it can easily start to trend towards trying to show the court that the other side is being unprofessional or out of line...sometimes, you should do this. Other times, it can start to detract from your case. If you have a strong case, better to let the focus stay on the case and not become about the attorneys. All of this is just commentary. I don't think it is a big deal or particularly egregious in what has happened in the submissions here. Just something that caught my eye. Oh, and it bears repeating, the decorum can vary a great deal in different courts (and before different judges). In some courts this might be very normal.
 
New file on pacer.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (“Motion”), which is currently scheduled to be heard May 16, 2011, is hereby continued to June 20, 2011 at 10:00 a.m.;

Defendants’ Opposition Papers to the Motion are hereby due on or before May 24, 2011;

Plaintiff’s Reply Papers in Support of the Motion are hereby due June 6, 2011.
 
As I said in another thread (overlooked this one): Courts aren't predictable. You can, in theory, be totally right on the merits of the case, yet judges who have no understanding of the issues involved in software development my still side with the plaintiff. Or, just as bad, the plaintiff may, as a fallback, attempt to tie the opposition in legal knots for years, without a final resolution.This huge amounts of money are spent, and a company with deep pockets hopes to sink the smaller company with legal bills.

In my own life, I consider the experiences of a close relative. They spent 10 years fighting in court for the proceeds of an investment that consumed their life savings. It's still not quite over, but they were only able to continue because they found an attorney with enough confidence in the case to wait for the conclusion before exacting payment.

Not that I expect that to happen here, but I'm trying to be realistic too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom