Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 1 of 20
|
|
- Brian Hilary Wheeler
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 1 of 20 John A. Anderson (#4464) jaanderson@stoel.com Timothy K. Conde (#10118) tkconde@stoel.com STOEL RIVES LLP 201 South Main Street, Suite 1100 Salt Lake City, UT Telephone: (801) Facsimile: (801) John DeQuedville Briggs (admitted pro hac vice) jbriggs@axinn.com Rachel J. Adcox (admitted pro hac vice) radcox@axinn.com AXINN VELTROP & HARKRIDER LLP 950 F Street NW Washington, DC Telephone: (202) Facsimile: (202) Attorneys for Defendant Yardi Systems, Inc. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION PROPERTY SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, vs. Plaintiff, YARDI SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation, ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Jury Trial Demanded Civil Action No. 2:15-cv DBP Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead Defendant.
2 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 2 of 20 Defendant Yardi Systems, Inc. ( Yardi ) hereby answers the Complaint (the Complaint ) filed by plaintiff Property Solutions International, Inc. ( Property Solutions or Plaintiff ) as follows: I. THE PARTIES 1. Yardi admits the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits the allegations in Paragraph 2. II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. Paragraph 3 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Yardi admits that Plaintiff purports to bring claims under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C et seq., and the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 1 et seq., but denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief. Yardi admits that the Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C Yardi admits that Plaintiff purports to bring claims under Section 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 15 and 26, but denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief. Yardi admits that the Court has supplemental jurisdiction over any Utah state-law claims for relief enumerated in this Complaint, pursuant to 28 U.S.C Yardi admits that the Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of each of the claims for relief asserted by Plaintiff pursuant to 28 U.S.C Yardi admits that there is complete diversity of citizenship. Yardi admits that Plaintiff purports to claim that the amount placed in controversy by each of Plaintiff s first through eighth claims for relief exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest, costs, and attorneys fees. Yardi admits that Plaintiff purports to claim that the value of the non-monetary relief sought by Plaintiff s claims for relief exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest, costs, and attorneys fees. 4. Paragraph 4 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Yardi admits that this Court may exercise personal jurisdiction
3 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 3 of 20 over Yardi, for purposes of this action only. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 5 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Yardi admits that venue within the State of Utah and in this judicial district is proper, for purposes of this action only. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 5. III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 6. Yardi states that it is a provider of a wide variety of high-performance software solutions and ancillary products and services for the real estate industry. Yardi denies as incomplete the allegations in Paragraph 6 purporting to describe the nature of propertymanagement software. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 7. A. Property Solutions and Its Products 8. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 8, and, on that basis, denies them. Property Solutions Entrata Products 9. Yardi denies that Plaintiff was the first comprehensive property management software provider to offer a single-login, open-access, Platform as a Service (or Software as a Service) system. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 9, and, on that basis, denies them. 10. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 10, and, on that basis, denies them. 11. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of 2
4 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 4 of 20 the allegations in Paragraph 11, and, on that basis, denies them. 12. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 12, and, on that basis, denies them. 13. Yardi denies that Entrata was marketed in Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 13, and, on that basis, denies them. Property Solutions Point Solution Products 14. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 14, and, on that basis, denies them. 15. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 15, and, on that basis, denies them. 16. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 16, and, on that basis, denies them. B. Yardi and Its Products 17. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 19. Yardi s Voyager Market Dominance 20. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that historically it allowed several different hosting options for its software and databases. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph 21. C. Property Solutions and Yardi s Initial Friendly Collaborations 22. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 22. 3
5 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 5 of Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that it markets and sells portal products in competition with many other companies, including Plaintiff. Yardi admits that Plaintiff contacted Yardi, proposing that Plaintiff become one of Yardi s third-party interfacing partners. Yardi further admits that in early 2006, Plaintiff sent an with contact information, corporate information, and two proposals, which Plaintiff purports to summarize. Yardi refers to that and the proposals for their contents and denies any additional characterizations thereof. Yardi denies that it assisted Plaintiff in developing Plaintiff s products. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 24, and, on that basis, denies them. 25. Yardi admits that it encouraged third-party providers to communicate with Yardi s database through a Yardi-designed standard interface and that Property Solutions instead designed its own custom interface. Yardi either denies or lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 25, and, on that basis, denies them. 26. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that Plaintiff sent a copy of the source code used in a Property Solutions interface utility to Yardi. Yardi admits that it reviewed the source code to detect any security or compatibility concerns. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that it charged some customers to host third-party custom interfaces on Yardi s servers. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 30. 4
6 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 6 of Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of whether Plaintiff referred customers to Yardi and recommended that they use Yardi s propertymanagement software, and, on that basis, denies that allegation. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 32, and, on that basis, denies them. 33. Yardi admits that, in December 2008, it wrote to third-party providers, informing them that they needed to be SAS70 compliant to continue interfacing with Yardi products. Yardi further admits that SAS70 (now known as SSAE 16) is an auditing standard used to verify that service providers have adequate controls and safeguards in place when they host or process data belonging to their customers and that Yardi communicated this information to clients when needed. Yardi admits that Property Solutions executed a letter agreement dated January 8, 2009, which Plaintiff purports to summarize. To the extent the allegations in Paragraph 33 are inconsistent with the fully executed letter agreement, Yardi denies them. Yardi denies the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 33. D. Yardi s Unlawful Efforts to Stifle Competition 34. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 34. False Messages to Customers and Yardi s Suit Against Another Software Company 35. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that, on January 24, 2011 after successfully avoiding litigation for the first 29 years of its history and making every attempt to do so in this instance Yardi filed a lawsuit against another provider of property management software and associated plug-ins, in which Yardi asserted a claim for copyright infringement, among other claims. Yardi also admits 5
7 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 7 of 20 that, after the lawsuit was filed, Yardi held a conference call with third-party providers, including Property Solutions. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of whether Property Solutions announced its launch of Entrata Core in the summer of 2012, and, on that basis, denies that allegation. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that it has entered into agreements with customers, which Plaintiff purports to summarize. Yardi refers to those agreements for their terms and denies any characterization thereof. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that, in 2012, Yardi began communicating that it would start charging vendors including Property Solutions $25,000 to use each of seven Yardi standard interfaces. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that it has attempted in good faith to come to terms with Plaintiff on a Data Exchange Agreement. Yardi further admits that Plaintiff provided Yardi with a document purporting to be a gap analysis, which Plaintiff purports to summarize. To the extent the allegations are inconsistent with the text of that document, Yardi denies them. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 41. Yardi s Lawsuit against Property Solutions 42. Yardi admits that, on October 21, 2013, Yardi commenced a lawsuit against Property Solutions in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, which asserts, among other claims, copyright infringement and trade secret misappropriation. Yardi admits that it maintains a website at that contains information related to Yardi s lawsuit in the 6
8 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 8 of 20 Central District of California. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that it notified existing and potential customers that Yardi would continue to support mutual customers. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 45. Yardi s Further False Assertions and Acts Aimed at Injuring Property Solutions 46. Yardi denies that it rendered Plaintiff s custom interface utility inaccessible. Yardi admits that it quarantined a diagnostics.asmx file due to a security vulnerability. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 46, and, on that basis, denies them. 47. Yardi admits that Plaintiff purports to be informed of and to believe the allegations in Paragraph 47, but Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that it quarantined a diagnostics.asmx file due to a security vulnerability on January 14, 2015 and then notified Plaintiff and mutual customers of that security step. 50. Yardi admits that it sent s to Plaintiff and mutual customers on January 14, 2015, which Plaintiff purports to summarize. Yardi refers to those s for their contents and denies any characterizations thereof. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that Yardi s Vice President and General Counsel, Arnold Brier, sent an on January 14, 2015, which Plaintiff purports to quote. Plaintiff refers to that for its contents and denies any characterization thereof. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph 51. 7
9 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 9 of Yardi admits that Arnold Brier sent an to Property Solutions Chief Legal Counsel, Jared Hunsaker, on January 14, 2015, which Plaintiff purports to characterize and quote. Yardi refers to that for its contents and denies any characterization thereof. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the first and last sentences of Paragraph 53. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 53, and, on that basis, denies them. 54. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 54, and, on that basis, denies them. 55. Yardi denies the first sentence of Paragraph 55. Yardi admits that Plaintiff purports to characterize a communication from a customer. Yardi refers to that communication for its contents and denies any characterization thereof. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that Jared Hunsaker sent a letter to Arnold Brier on January 15, 2015, which Plaintiff purports to quote and characterize. Yardi refers to that letter for its contents and denies any characterization thereof. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph 56. Yardi s Acts of Coercion against Property Solutions 57. Yardi denies that its actions have been improper. Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 57, and, on that basis, denies them. 58. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of 8
10 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 10 of 20 the allegations in Paragraph 59, and, on that basis, denies them. 60. Yardi denies the first sentence of Paragraph 60. Yardi admits that its CEO, Anant Yardi sent an to Plaintiff s CEO, Dave Bateman, on January 15, 2015, which Plaintiff purports to summarize. Yardi refers to that for its contents and denies any characterization thereof. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 62. E. Pertinent Markets and Yardi s Market Power 63. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that Yardi, Property Solutions and other companies offer competing portal software products that interface with other property-management software, such as Voyager. Yardi admits that it is therefore not a dominant provider of portal products. Yardi denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 67. IV. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF FIRST CLAIM (Injurious Falsehood) Yardi incorporates by reference each of its responses to the foregoing Paragraphs as if fully restated herein. 69. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi notes that Plaintiff has failed to identify the legal source of this claim; e.g., a statute or the common law of a particular state. 9
11 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 11 of Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 74. SECOND CLAIM (False Advertising) 75. Yardi incorporates by reference each of its responses to the foregoing Paragraphs as if fully restated herein. 76. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 78 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 81 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 81. THIRD CLAIM (Utah Deceptive Trade Practices) 82. Yardi incorporates by reference each of its responses to the foregoing Paragraphs as if fully restated herein. 83. Paragraph 83 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 84 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi admits that Plaintiff sent Yardi a letter on January 15, 2015, which Plaintiff 10
12 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 12 of 20 purports to characterize. Yardi refers to that letter for its contents and denies any characterization thereof. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 86, and Yardi denies that any such correction notice was necessary or required. 87. Paragraph 87 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 87. FOURTH CLAIM (Tortious Interference) Yardi incorporates by reference each of its responses to the foregoing Paragraphs as if fully restated herein. 89. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 93. FIFTH CLAIM (Monopolization and Attempted Monopolization of the Accounting Product Market) 94. Yardi incorporates by reference each of its responses to the foregoing Paragraphs as if fully restated herein. 95. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi notes that Plaintiff has failed to identify the legal source of this claim; e.g., a statute or the common law of a particular state. 11
13 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 13 of Paragraph 99 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 100 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 100. SIXTH CLAIM (Monopoly Leveraging and Attempted Monopolization of the Integration Product Market) 101. Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 105 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 106 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 106. SEVENTH CLAIM (Unlawful Tying) 107. Yardi incorporates by reference each of its responses to the foregoing Paragraphs as if fully restated herein Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph
14 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 14 of Paragraph 114 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 115 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 118 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph 118. EIGHTH CLAIM (Breach of Contract Third Party Beneficiary) 119. Yardi incorporates by reference each of its responses to the foregoing Paragraphs as if fully restated herein Yardi admits that it has entered into agreements with customers, which Plaintiff purports to summarize. Yardi refers to those agreements for their terms, and denies any characterization thereof. Yardi denies any remaining allegations in Paragraph Paragraph 121 consists of legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph Yardi denies the allegations in Paragraph
15 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 15 of 20 V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Plaintiff s prayer for relief contains no factual allegations and therefore requires no response. To the extent a response is deemed required, Yardi denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief. VI. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Without conceding that it has the burden of proof on any issue, Yardi asserts the following defenses and reserves the right to amend this Answer, as necessary, to assert additional defenses that become apparent during the course of investigation and discovery. First Affirmative Defense (Failure to State a Claim) Plaintiff has failed to adequately state a claim on which relief can be granted. Second Affirmative Defense (Statute of Limitations) Plaintiff s claims are barred by applicable statutes of limitations. Third Affirmative Defense (Laches) Plaintiff s claims are barred because of its unreasonable delay in bringing this action. Fourth Affirmative Defense (Waiver) Plaintiff s claims are barred because its conduct, including its ongoing business activities with Yardi and its work with Yardi to close security vulnerabilities, has been inconsistent with its assertion of the claims in the Complaint. 14
16 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 16 of 20 Fifth Affirmative Defense (Estoppel) Plaintiff s claims are barred because Yardi has relied on statements and conduct by the Plaintiff that are inconsistent with the relief Plaintiff seeks in the Complaint, including Plaintiff s acquiescence in Yardi s conduct. Sixth Affirmative Defense (Ratification) Plaintiff s claims are barred because Plaintiff has ratified Yardi s conduct, including through Plaintiff s ongoing business dealings with Yardi and work with Yardi to close security vulnerabilities. the parties. Seventh Affirmative Defense (Collateral Estoppel) Plaintiff is estopped from relitigating issues already decided in prior litigation between Eighth Affirmative Defense (Absolute Privilege) Plaintiff s claims are barred because they are based on Yardi s statements and conduct in connection with judicial proceedings. Ninth Affirmative Defense (Qualified Privilege) Plaintiff s claims are barred because they are based on Yardi s good-faith, fair comments made to parties in a relationship with Yardi and with an interest in the subject matter of the communications. 15
17 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 17 of 20 statements. Tenth Affirmative Defense (Truth) Plaintiff s claims are barred because they are based on substantially or completely true Eleventh Affirmative Defense (Opinion) Plaintiff s claims are barred because they are based on non-actionable, privileged statements of opinion. Twelfth Affirmative Defense (Absence of Malice) Plaintiff s claims are barred because Yardi has always acted in good faith. Thirteenth Affirmative Defense (Justification) Plaintiff s claims are barred because Yardi s conduct was justified by Yardi s need to protect its security and other interests as well as those of its customers. Amendment. Fourteenth Affirmative Defense (First Amendment) Plaintiff s claims are barred because they are based on statements protected by the First Fifteenth Affirmative Defense (Mitigating Circumstances) Although Plaintiff is not entitled to any relief, all of Yardi s statements and conduct that may be the subject of the Complaint were made in good faith and with the honest belief in their truth, warranting a reduction of any damages that may be awarded to Plaintiff. 16
18 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 18 of 20 Sixteenth Affirmative Defense (Failure to Identify Special Damages) Plaintiff s claims are barred because Plaintiff has failed to identify any specific injury attributable to Yardi s conduct. Seventeenth Affirmative Defense (Fair Competition) Plaintiff's claims are barred because they are based on legal and proper conduct in furtherance of Yardi s economic interests. Eighteenth Affirmative Defense (Noerr-Pennington Doctrine) Plaintiff s claims are barred because they are based on Yardi s legitimate efforts to enforce its interests and the law through the courts. Nineteenth Affirmative Defense (Procompetitive Conduct) Plaintiff s claims are barred because they are based on procompetitive conduct. Twentieth Affirmative Defense (Defenses to Underlying Contracts) Although Plaintiff has not identified the contracts under which it claims rights as a thirdparty beneficiary, Yardi will assert against Plaintiff all available defenses to any alleged breach of any contract that Plaintiff ultimately identifies. Twenty-First Affirmative Defense (Unclean Hands) Plaintiff s claims are barred by unclean hands because Plaintiff has engaged in the same conduct it accuses Yardi of engaging in. 17
19 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 19 of 20 Twenty-Second Affirmative Defense (Failure to Mitigate) Plaintiff is not entitled to damages arising from its failure to mitigate its alleged injury. Twenty-Third Affirmative Defense (Setoff) Although Plaintiff is not entitled to any relief, any damages awarded to Plaintiff are subject to setoff by amounts that Plaintiff owes or will owe to Yardi. Twenty-Fourth Affirmative Defense (Reservation of Rights) Yardi reserves its right to assert additional affirmative defenses and/or counterclaims. WHEREFORE, Yardi prays for judgment as follows: 1. That Property Solutions take nothing by way of the Complaint; 2. That Yardi be awarded judgment against Property Solutions and awarded its costs and attorneys fees to the extent permitted by law; and proper. 3. That Yardi be awarded other and further relief as this Court deems just and 18
20 Case 2:15-cv DBP Document 26 Filed 03/24/15 Page 20 of 20 Dated: March 24, 2015 Respectfully submitted, /s/ John DeQ. Briggs John DeQ. Briggs Rachel J. Adcox AXINN, VELTROP & HARKRIDER LLP 950 F Street NW Washington, DC Telephone: (202) Facsimile: (202) John A. Andersen Timothy K. Conde STOEL RIVES LLP 201 South Main Street, Suite 1100 Salt Lake City, UT Telephone: (801) Facsimile: (801) Attorneys for Defendant Yardi Systems, Inc. 19
Case 1:16-cv LGS Document 21 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 1:16-cv-00934-LGS Document 21 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Laspata DeCaro Studio Corporation, Case No: 1:16-cv-00934-LGS - against - Plaintiff,
More informationCase5:09-cv JW Document106 Filed04/22/10 Page1 of 9
Case:0-cv-0-JW Document0 Filed0//0 Page of 0 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Charles K. Verhoeven (Bar No. 0) charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com Melissa J. Baily (Bar No. ) melissabaily@quinnemanuel.com
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Case 1:15-cv-00405-CCE-JEP Document 7 Filed 07/10/15 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ) LIMECCA CORBIN, on behalf of herself and ) similarly situated
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
David L. Kagel (Calif. Bar No. 1 John Torbett (Calif. State Bar No. Law Offices of David Kagel, PLC 01 Century Park East, th Floor Los Angeles, CA 00 Telephone: ( -00 Fax: ( - Attorneys Admitted Pro Hac
More informationCase 3:15-cv RGJ-KLH Document 38 Filed 11/25/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 257 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 3:15-cv-02907-RGJ-KLH Document 38 Filed 11/25/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 257 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA JOSEPH HENDERSON, SR. * CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:15CV02907 * VERSUS
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/25/ :15 AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK EVA SCRIVO FIFTH AVENUE, INC., vs. Plaintiff, ANNIE RUSH and COSETTE FIFTH AVENUE, LLC, Defendants. Index No. 656723/2016 VERIFIED ANSWER TO DEFENDANTS
More informationCase3:13-cv SI Document11 Filed03/26/13 Page1 of 17
Case:-cv-000-SI Document Filed0// Page of CHRISTOPHER J. BORDERS (SBN: 0 cborders@hinshawlaw.com AMY K. JENSEN (SBN: ajensen@hinshawlaw.com HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP One California Street, th Floor San
More informationCase 1:12-cv DJC Document 36 Filed 09/10/13 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 1:12-cv-11280-DJC Document 36 Filed 09/10/13 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x KAREN L. BACCHI,
More informationCase 3:08-cv VRW Document 11 Filed 05/22/2008 Page 1 of 9
Case :0-cv-0-VRW Document Filed 0//0 Page of BRAMSON, PLUTZIK, MAHLER & BIRKHAEUSER, LLP Alan R. Plutzik (State Bar No. ) Michael S. Strimling (State Bar No. ) Oak Grove Road, Suite 0 Walnut Creek, California
More informationCase 4:17-cv PJH Document 61 Filed 02/28/18 Page 1 of 33
Case :-cv-0-pjh Document Filed 0// Page of Brenda A. Prackup Law Office of Brenda A. Prackup 000 MacArthur Blvd. East Tower, th Floor Newport Beach, CA 0 Tel:.. Email: brenda@baplawoffice.com Attorney
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABAMA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABAMA ELECTRONICALLY FILED 12/17/2012 2:06 PM CV-2012-901531.00 CIRCUIT COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABAMA FLORENCE CAUTHEN, CLERK INNOVATION SPORTS & ) ENTERTAINMENT,
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/07/ :32 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 164 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/07/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK VERIFIED REPLY TO 89 BOWERY AND HUA YANG'S COUNTERCLAIMS IN VERIFIED AMENDED ANSWER Index No. 150738/2017 Plaintiff, 93 BOWERY HOLDINGS LLC ("93
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP PAUL S. COWIE, Cal. Bar No. 01 pcowie@sheppardmuilin.com MICHAEL H. GIACINTI, Cal. Bar No. mgiacinti@sheppardmullin.com Lytton Avenue Palo Alto, California 01-1
More informationKanter v. California Administrative Office of the Courts Doc. 10 Case 3:07-cv MJJ Document 10 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 1 of 13
Kanter v. California Administrative Office of the Courts Doc. Case :0-cv-0-MJJ Document Filed 0/0/00 Page of 0 PATRICIA K. GILLETTE (Bar No. ) GREG J. RICHARDSON (Bar No. 0) BROOKE D. ANDRICH (Bar No.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
MANTIS COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION v. Plaintiff, CULVER FRANCHISING SYSTEM, INC., CASE NO. 2:17-cv-324 PATENT CASE JURY
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION. Plaintiff, Defendant.
2:10-cv-03075-RMG Date Filed 02/25/11 Entry Number 22 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION Righthaven LLC, Dana Eiser, v. Plaintiff, Defendant. Civil
More informationthe unverified First Amended Complaint (the Complaint ) of plaintiffs MIKE SPITZER and
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 1 1 1 Defendant FRHI HOTELS & RESORTS (CANADA) INC. ( Defendant ) hereby answers the unverified First Amended Complaint (the Complaint ) of plaintiffs MIKE SPITZER and MICHELLE MACOMBER
More informationCase 1:16-cv FAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2017 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:16-cv-20683-FAM Document 50 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2017 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION HERON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY. Defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. (hereinafter FedEx Ground ), by and
THE HONORABLE BRUCE HELLER SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR KING COUNTY MITCH SPENCER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, No. --00- SEA v. Plaintiff, ACTION COMPLAINT FEDEX GROUND
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/09/ :30 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/09/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X 115 KINGSTON AVENUE LLC, and 113 KINGSTON LLC, Plaintiffs, VERIFIED ANSWER -against- Index No.: 654456/16 MT. HAWLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, UNITED
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/05/ :37 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 23 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/05/2014
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/05/2014 12:37 PM INDEX NO. 156171/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 23 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/05/2014 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------------------X
More informationDEFENDANTS' VERIFIED ANSWER
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/15/2016 11:34 AM INDEX NO. 154310/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/15/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x KRISHNA DEBYSINGH, -against-
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ANSWER
CASE 0:12-cv-00528-RHK-JJK Document 31 Filed 07/20/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS and JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC., vs. Plaintiffs, SCHWEGMAN
More informationCase 1:14-cv JCC-IDD Document 7 Filed 10/14/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID# 39
Case 1:14-cv-01326-JCC-IDD Document 7 Filed 10/14/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID# 39 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION Jeremy L. Baum, Plaintiff, v. JPMorgan
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/30/ :41 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2016
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/30/2016 03:41 PM INDEX NO. 651348/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/30/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK MARK D ANDREA, Plaintiff,
More informationR. BRIAN DIXON, Bar No LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Case :-cv-000-jgb-rao Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 R. BRIAN DIXON, Bar No. 0 bdixon@littler.com Bush Street, th Floor San Francisco, CA 0 Telephone:..0 Facsimile:..0 DOUGLAS A. WICKHAM, Bar
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION. Case No. 3:18-CV FDW-DSC
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION JAMES SEITZ, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF LAUREN E. SEITZ, DECEASED, Case No. 3:18-CV-00044-FDW-DSC v.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO
Case:-cv-0-JSW Document Filed0// Page of 0 0 J. Rick Taché (#00) rtache@swlaw.com Deborah S. Mallgrave (#0) dmallgrave@swlaw.com Harsh P. Parikh (#0) hparikh@swlaw.com SNELL & WILMER Costa Mesa, CA - Telephone:
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA * * *
BRETT L. MCKAGUE, ESQ. SBN 0 JEREMY J. SCHROEDER, ESQ. SBN FLESHER MCKAGUE LLP 0 Plaza Drive Rocklin, CA Telephone: ().0 Facsimile: (). Attorneys for defendant and cross-defendant, GENTRY ASSOCIATES CONSTRUCTION
More informationCase 1:17-cv PBS Document 24 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:17-cv-10356-PBS Document 24 Filed 05/26/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS JONATHAN MONSARRAT, v. Plaintiff, GOTPER6067-00001and DOES 1-5, dba ENCYCLOPEDIADRAMATICA.SE,
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION ROSLYN J. JOHNSON, Plaintiff, No. 2007 CA 001600 B Judge Gerald I. Fisher v. Calendar 1 JONETTA ROSE BARRAS, et al., Next event: Scheduling
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/19/2012 INDEX NO /2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 135 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/19/2012
FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/19/2012 INDEX NO. 100061/2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 135 RECEIVED NYSCEF 07/19/2012 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
More informationHUSHHUSH ENTERTAINMENT, INC.
PlainSite Legal Document Florida Southern District Court Case No. 1:15-cv-23888 HUSHHUSH ENTERTAINMENT, INC. v. Mindgeek USA, Inc. et al Document 27 View Document View Docket A joint project of Think Computer
More informationFILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 02/24/ /31/ :26 08:31 PM AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 637 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/24/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------X MARIA C. CORSO, FRANK J. IANNO -against- Plaintiff, ANSWER WITH COUNTERCLAIMS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1 1 1 Sterling A. Brennan (CA State Bar No. 01) E-Mail: sbrennan@mabr.com Tyson K. Hottinger (CA State Bar No. 1) E-Mail: thottinger@mabr.com MASCHOFF BRENNAN LAYCOCK GILMORE ISRAELSEN & WRIGHT, PLLC 0
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
White Wave International Labs, Inc. v. Lohan et al Doc. 42 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION WHITE WAVE INTERNATIONAL LABS, INC., a Florida corporation Case No. 8:09-cv-01260-VMC-TGW
More informationCase 4:10-cv TSH Document 4 Filed 02/24/11 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 4:10-cv-40257-TSH Document 4 Filed 02/24/11 Page 1 of 9 WAKEELAH A. COCROFT, ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) ) JEREMY SMITH, ) Defendant ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS C.A. No. 10-40257-FDS
More informationFILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/22/ :49 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 23 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/22/2016. Exhibit D {N
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/22/2016 12:49 PM INDEX NO. 504403/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 23 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/22/2016 Exhibit D {N0194821.1 } SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS x THE BOARD
More informationCase: 1:12-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 03/05/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Case: 1:12-cv-00640 Document #: 21 Filed: 03/05/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS RUDE MUSIC, INC. ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) NO.: 1:12-cv-00640
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/31/ :46 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 112 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/31/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO Assunte Catazano a/k/a Sue Catazano, as Personal INDEX NO. 190298-16 Representative
More informationCase 2:15-cv CMR Document 6 Filed 03/28/16 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:15-cv-06132-CMR Document 6 Filed 03/28/16 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MICHAEL MACDONALD Plaintiff, v. Case No. 2:15-cv-06132-CMR JURY
More informationFILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 03/30/ :14 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 62 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/30/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF RICHMOND ------------------------------------------------------------------------X INDEX NO. 135492/2016 DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE
More informationANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM BUSINESS DISPUTE
ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM BUSINESS DISPUTE "Redacted" Case Document 98 Filed 09/15/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION v. v.,.,, Plaintiffs,
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/07/ :53 PM INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 64 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/07/2015
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/07/2015 03:53 PM INDEX NO. 158552/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 64 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/07/2015 SUPREME COURT: STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF 11-15 EAST
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/13/ :43 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/13/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------- x CYNTHIA CEBALLOS, Index No. 160696/2016 Plaintiff, CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA, INC.,
More informationCase 2:13-cv CG-WPL Document 17 Filed 09/18/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 2:13-cv-00727-CG-WPL Document 17 Filed 09/18/13 Page 1 of 10 DAVID ECKERT Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO vs. No. 2:13-cv-00727-CG/WPL THE CITY OF DEMING. DEMING
More informationCase 2:12-cv APG-PAL Document 168 Filed 04/16/14 Page 1 of 12
Case :-cv-00-apg-pal Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Ryan W. Mitchem (TN #0) Michael K. Alston (TN #0) Kathryn Ann Reilly (CO #) HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP Georgia Avenue, Suite 00 Chattanooga, Tennessee 0 Telephone:
More informationCase 1:14-cv CMA-KMT Document 1081 Filed 05/16/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 30 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:14-cv-074-CMA-KMT Document 1081 Filed 05/16/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of Civil Action No. 14-cv-074-CMA-KMT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO JOHANA PAOLA BELTRAN; LUSAPHO
More informationCase 1:07-cv GMS Document 25 Filed 11/19/2007 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:07-cv-00228-GMS Document 25 Filed 11/19/2007 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE JEFFREY D. HILL, : : Plaintiff, : : C.A. No. 07-228 (GMS) v. : : JURY TRIAL
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/ :23 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 18 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/26/2015
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/2015 01:23 PM INDEX NO. 190245/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 18 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/26/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------X
More informationPLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO DEFENDANTS GORDON RAMSAY'S AND G.R. US LICENSING'S AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/11/2016 11:55 AM INDEX NO. 651046/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/11/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------------------------------)(
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/ :47 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 61 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2015
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/17/2015 01:47 PM INDEX NO. 190350/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 61 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/17/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK In RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS
More informationCase 3:16-cv DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 1 of 11
Case 3:16-cv-00657-DPJ-FKB Document 9 Filed 10/24/16 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION KIMBERLY V. BRACEY VS. PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Apple, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. et al Doc. 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN APPLE INC. v. Plaintiff, MOTOROLA, INC. and MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) )
More informationFILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 08/21/ :37 PM INDEX NO /2016
INDEX NO. 521852/2016 FILED : KINGS COUNTY CLERK 11:22 AM SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS RAHIM ALI, Index No.: 521852/2016 Plaintiff, - against - GIBRAN KHAN, 1886 SCHENECTADY AVE.,
More informationINDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION
FORM E.C. 4B (v) 2015 INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION NOMINATION FORM FOR MEMBER HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NAME OF CANDIDATE:.. CONSTITUENCY:.. STATE:. Affix passport photograph INDEPENDENT NATIONAL
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/ :49 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/26/2015
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/2015 03:49 PM INDEX NO. 190202/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/26/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK In RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS
More informationCase 1:17-cv LAP Document 88 Filed 07/20/18 Page 1 of 17
Case :-cv-000-lap Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU and THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BY ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN,
More informationCase 3:13-cv M Document 60 Filed 12/19/14 Page 1 of 20 PageID 1778
Case 3:13-cv-04987-M Document 60 Filed 12/19/14 Page 1 of 20 PageID 1778 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ILIFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. NINTENDO
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT YAKIMA
Case :-cv-000-smj ECF No. filed // PageID.00 Page of Brendan V. Sullivan, Jr. Steven M. Cady WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP Twelfth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 000 Tel.: 0-- scady@wc.com Maren R. Norton 00
More information3:13-cv JFA Date Filed 04/04/13 Entry Number 4 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
3:13-cv-00882-JFA Date Filed 04/04/13 Entry Number 4 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION Charles Smith, individually and as Parent of Minor
More informationCase 3:17-cv DPJ-FKB Document 5 Filed 05/19/17 Page 1 of 15
Case 3:17-cv-00270-DPJ-FKB Document 5 Filed 05/19/17 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION TINA L. WALLACE PLAINTIFF VS. CITY OF JACKSON,
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/09/ :55 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY a/s/o Index No.: 152491/2017 ROCKROSE DEVELOPMENT CORP., Plaintiff, VERIFIED ANSWER TO CROSS-CLAIMS OF -against- THIRD-PARTY
More informationCase 8:13-cv JSM-AEP Document 17 Filed 01/14/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID 64 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Case 8:13-cv-03084-JSM-AEP Document 17 Filed 01/14/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID 64 SHELENE JEAN-LOUIS, JUDES PETIT-FRERE, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE
More informationCase: 1:10-cv Document #: 20 Filed: 04/11/11 Page 1 of 26 PageID #:217
Case: 1:10-cv-08050 Document #: 20 Filed: 04/11/11 Page 1 of 26 PageID #:217 FIRE 'EM UP, INC., v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION Plaintiff,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
CASE 0:17-cv-03207-JNE-FLN Document 1 Filed 07/21/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA IN RE: Bair Hugger Forced Air Warming Products Liability Litigation MDL No. 15-2666 (JNE/FLN)
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/11/ :17 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 85 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/11/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------x Index No.: 655023/2016 DAWN JONES, DDS and EXCLUSIVE DENTAL STUDIOS, PLLC. d/b/a
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/30/ :06 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 60 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/30/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------------x LEROY BAKER, Index No.: 190058/2017 Plaintiff, -against- AF SUPPLY USA INC.,
More informationDOCKET NO. the City of Millville, County of Cumberland and State of New Jersey, by way of FIRST COUNT
Fj Law Offices NED P. ROGOVOY, ESQUIRE, L.L.C. Attorney ID #008141073 782 South Brewster Road, Unit A-6 Vineland, New Jersey 08362 (856) 205-9701 Attorney for Plaintiff ROBERT R. HULITT, SR. Plaintiff
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/28/ :02 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/28/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------------- x IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL --------------------------------------------------------------------
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MOTOWN RECORD COMPANY, L.P. a California limited partnership; UMG RECORDINGS, INC., a Delaware corporation; SONY BMG MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, a
More informationCase5:02-cv JF Document3 Filed11/06/02 Page1 of 14
Case:0-cv-0-JF Document Filed/0/0 Page of JAMES R. HAWLEY -- BAR NO. 0 KATHRYN CHOW BAR NO. 0 HOGE, FENTON, JONES & APPEL, INC. Sixty South Market Street, Suite 00 San Jose, California - Phone: (0) -0
More informationFILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 01/23/ :02 PM
FILED: ONEIDA COUNTY CLERK 01/23/2017 12:02 PM INDEX NO. EFCA2016-002373 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/23/2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF ONEIDA FRANK JAKUBOWKI AND GLORIA
More informationConsolidated Class Action Complaint ( Complaint ) filed by Plaintiffs JAMES E. ELIAS and GENERAL DENIAL
0 0 Defendant SYNCRHONY BANK ( Defendant ) hereby answers the Third Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint ( Complaint ) filed by Plaintiffs JAMES E. ELIAS and JAMES P. KOZIK ( Plaintiffs ) as follows:
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/08/2013 INDEX NO /2010 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/08/2013
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/08/2013 INDEX NO. 651997/2010 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/08/2013 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: COMMERCIAL DIVISION PETER DAOU and
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TH EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-1294 v.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TH EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION CRYPTOPEAK SOLUTIONS, LLC, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-1294 v. CHARLES SCHWAB & CO., INC., JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Dockets.Justia.com UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. 8 GILCREASE LANE, QUINCY, FLORIDA 32351 et al Doc. 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff, 8 GILCREASE
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/03/2013 INDEX NO /2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 108 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/03/2013
FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/03/2013 INDEX NO. 652635/2011 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 108 RECEIVED NYSCEF 10/03/2013 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK STATE OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
More informationCase 4:18-cv JSW Document 14 Filed 02/23/18 Page 1 of 13. Attorneys for Defendants CITY OF VALLEJO, JARRETT TONN, KEVIN BARRETO, and SEAN KENNEY
Case :-cv-00-jsw Document Filed 0// Page of CLAUDIA M. QUINTANA City Attorney, SBN BY: KATELYN M. KNIGHT Deputy City Attorney, SBN CITY OF VALLEJO, City Hall Santa Clara Street, P.O. Box 0 Vallejo, CA
More informationFILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/13/ :12 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 13 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/13/2017
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ----------------------------------------x MONSOUR MARDJANI, as Administrator of the Estate of WILMA MARDJANI and MONSOUR MARDJANI, Individually,
More informationCase 2:17-cv EEF-MBN Document 66 Filed 11/07/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 2:17-cv-06197-EEF-MBN Document 66 Filed 11/07/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ADRIAN CALISTE AND BRIAN GISCLAIR, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/06/ :18 PM INDEX NO /2006 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/06/2016. Exhibit 21
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/06/2016 06:18 PM INDEX NO. 111768/2006 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/06/2016 Exhibit 21 SCAf.r.EllONWIOl11l1,---------------------- SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/15/ :24 AM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2016
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/15/2016 11:24 AM INDEX NO. 190043/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 12 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X JOHN D. FIEDERLEIN AND
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/28/ :04 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/28/2016
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/28/2016 05:04 PM INDEX NO. 190293/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 55 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/28/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X VINCENT ASCIONE, v. ALCOA,
More informationCase: 1:17-cv Document #: 31 Filed: 03/09/18 Page 1 of 26 PageID #:165
Case: 1:17-cv-09154 Document #: 31 Filed: 03/09/18 Page 1 of 26 PageID #:165 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION BILLY GOAT IP LLC, Plaintiff, Case
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/10/ :54 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/10/2016
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/10/2016 02:54 PM INDEX NO. 190047/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/10/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X NORMAN DOIRON AND ELAINE
More informationCase: 25CH1:15-cv Document #: 7 Filed: 10/05/2015 Page 1 of 16
Case: 25CH1:15-cv-001479 Document #: 7 Filed: 10/05/2015 Page 1 of 16 IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI MISSISSIPPI FAIR COMMISSION PLAINTIFF VS. CIVIL ACTION
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/07/ :33 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 49 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/07/2016
FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/07/2016 0433 PM INDEX NO. 190115/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 49 RECEIVED NYSCEF 06/07/2016 LYNCH DASKAL EMERY LLP 137 West 25th Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10001 (212) 302-2400
More informationCase 1:07-cv MRB Document 6 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Case 1:07-cv-00852-MRB Document 6 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION ESCORT, INC., Plaintiff, V. COBRA ELECTRONICS CORPORATION,
More informationAttorneys for Defendant SAK CONSTRUCTION, LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
GARY V. ABBOTT, Oregon State Bar Number 720072 E-mail address: gabbott@abbott-law.com US Bancorp Tower, Suite 2650 111 Southwest Fifth Avenue Telephone: Facsimile : (503) 595-9519 Attorneys for Defendant
More information7:14-cv TMC Date Filed 12/02/14 Entry Number 6 Page 1 of 8
7:14-cv-04094-TMC Date Filed 12/02/14 Entry Number 6 Page 1 of 8 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRIC OF SOUTH CAROLINA SPARTANBURG DIVISION Frederick Hankins and David Seegars, )
More informationDefendant, Prevost Car (US) Inc., Individually and as. Successor to Nova Bus, by its attorneys, MAIMONE & ASSOCIATES,
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/08/2016 11:03 PM INDEX NO. 190300/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/08/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------X
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil Case No.: 18-cv (WMW/SER)
CASE 0:18-cv-02420-ECT-SER Document 24 Filed 08/30/18 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil Case No.: 18-cv-02420 (WMW/SER) FRIDAY & COX, LLC, Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS' JOINT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS ROXIE SIBLEY, JEANNE NOEL, ) ERNESTO BENNETT, JAMIE WILLIAMS, ) GREG ST. JULIEN, TRACIE HERNANDEZ, ) JOHN JASINSKI, JAY RICHIE, and ) TEISHA
More informationCase 1:11-cv RMC Document 1 Filed 08/20/10 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 1:11-cv-01128-RMC Document 1 Filed 08/20/10 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION STARLINGER & CO. GMBH, V. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 2:08-cv-00184-RAED Document 10 Filed 08/21/2008 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN RICHARD GEROUX, vs. Plaintiff, ASSURANT, INC., and UNION SECURITY
More informationCase 1:17-cv TSC Document 13 Filed 09/08/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:17-cv-01295-TSC Document 13 Filed 09/08/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 17-CV-01295 v. UNITED STATES
More information)(
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 07/15/2016 05:35 PM INDEX NO. 57971/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/15/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER --------------------------------------------------------------------------)(
More informationPlainSite. Legal Document
PlainSite Legal Document New York Southern District Court Case No. 1:12-cv-00201 The Velvet Underground v. The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. Document 33 View Document View Docket A joint
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
JOHN DOE, v. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION BARROW COUNTY, GEORGIA; and WALTER E. ELDER, in his official capacity as Chairman of
More information