IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Similar documents
in the United States Courthouse, 312 N. Spring St., Los Angeles, CA Pursuant to

United States District Court Northern District of Illinois - CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 2.4 (Chicago) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:97-cv-03475

Case 1:11-cv JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/06/2011 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 2:17-cv WB Document 97 Filed 12/26/18 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 3:13-cv JHM-DW Document 40 Filed 03/06/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 646

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case 4:07-cv CW Document 39 Filed 12/07/2007 Page 1 of 5

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 94 Filed: 12/15/10 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:1602

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVISION

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 626 Filed: 04/25/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:23049

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/12/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:1

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 35 Filed: 09/13/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:130

Case hdh Doc 97 Filed 01/09/18 Entered 01/09/18 21:23:39 Page 1 of 8

Case sgj15 Doc 4 Filed 03/10/14 Entered 03/10/14 00:07:45 Page 1 of 18

Case: 1:18-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

Case: Document: 26-1 Filed: 12/04/2014 Pages: 6 NO IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) )

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 22 Filed: 09/25/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:619

Case 1:17-cv WYD-MEH Document 9 Filed 09/22/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

COMMERCIAL CALENDAR I (Effective January 30, 2012)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case 2:10-cv RLH -PAL Document 29 Filed 12/02/10 Page 1 of 8

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 64 Filed: 08/25/15 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:873

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 08/28/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT CHANCERY DIVISION CALENDAR 7 COURTROOM 2405 JUDGE DIANE J. LARSEN STANDING ORDER 2.

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 155 Filed: 12/17/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1288 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: Filed: 11/07/11 Page 15 of 28 PageID #:2498

These rights and options and the deadlines to exercise them are explained below.

Case 2:14-cv JRG Document 1 Filed 09/12/14 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT

Case Doc 239 Filed 04/05/12 Entered 04/05/12 12:20:20 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 5

Case 1:13-cv WMS Document 25 Filed 04/16/13 Page 1 of 4

Case 1:13-cv GJQ Doc #12 Filed 04/16/14 Page 1 of 7 Page ID#34 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 4:17-cv ALM Document 26 Filed 06/02/17 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 543

AGREED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

Case: 1:69-cv Document #: 3762 Filed: 05/15/14 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:23784

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION. v. No. 1:18-cv- COMPLAINT COLLECTIVE ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION STANDING ORDER

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 11/15/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1

COMMERCIAL CALENDAR N (Effective February 8, 2013)

Case: 1:18-cv Document #: 24 Filed: 05/16/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:499

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA - Alexandria Division -

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

Case 1:06-cv Document 44 Filed 03/27/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 58 Filed: 11/10/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:314

Case 1:17-cv LY Document 1 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR NASSAU COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION. vs. DIVISION: A

Case 4:17-cv HSG Document 180 Filed 12/26/18 Page 1 of 3

Case 3:10-cv N Document 24 Filed 10/29/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID 444

Case 3:13-cv JJB-SCR Document 27 09/20/13 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Case 2:14-cv SPL Document 25 Filed 09/11/14 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case 2:13-mc SRB Document 6 Filed 04/18/13 Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. 5:07-CV-231

COMMERCIAL CALENDAR N (Effective November 17, 2010)

Case 8:17-cv Document 1 Filed 11/21/17 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:1

Case 1:18-cv LY Document 43 Filed 09/17/18 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 27 Filed: 10/02/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:752

Case: 25CH1:18-cv Document #: 19 Filed: 05/25/2018 Page 1 of 2 IN THE CHANCERY COURT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. -v- Civil No. 3:12-cv-4176

IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE DISTRICT COURT DIVISION., ) Plaintiff, ) ) CONSENT STIPULATIONS FOR v. ) ARBITRATION PROCEDURES ), ) Defendant.

Case 8:14-cv JDW-EAJ Document 10 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID 81 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 2:11-cv JEM Document 89 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2011 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 4:15-cv DLH-CSM Document 5 Filed 05/05/15 Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case: Document: 6 Filed: 11/03/2016 Pages: 6 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT. No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Case 2:16-cv RSM Document 60 Filed 01/26/17 Page 1 of 8 Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

CALENDAR Q. JUDGE BILL TAYLOR 2007 RICHARD J. DALEY CENTER CHICAGO, ILLINOIS fax

Case: 1:10 cv Document #: 63 Filed: 11/18/10 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:1079

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION. Plaintiff, Motion to Certify under 28 U.S.C.

CHAPTER 4 CIVIL CASE MANAGEMENT

Case Number: CIV-MARTINEZ-GOODMAN DEFAULT FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANTS YOUR YELLOW PAGES. INC., CITY PAGES. INC..

Case 3:18-cv M Document 62 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1084

Case 9:15-cv KAM Document 37 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/03/2015 Page 1 of 7

Case 2:12-cv JFB-ETB Document 26 Filed 06/19/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 158 CV (JFB)(ETB)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

Case 1:16-cv EGS Document 14 Filed 07/12/16 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Plaintiff, Plaintiff,

:li([i~.j~}. ~.J Case No VCP

I. ANSWER. COMES NOW Defendant IMPULSE MEDIA GROUP, INC. in the above-captioned

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 9:16-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2016 Page 1 of 6

What does it mean to domesticate a foreign judgment?

Case 2:16-cv JNP Document 105 Filed 08/17/17 Page 1 of 106

Case 2:15-cv GMN-PAL Document 62 Filed 06/16/16 Page 1 of 6

PlainSite. Legal Document. Florida Middle District Court Case No. 6:10-cv Career Network, Inc. et al v. WOT Services, Ltd. et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

Case 1:18-mj KMW Document 7 Filed 04/13/18 Page 1 of 9

Case: 1:11-cv Document #: 353 Filed: 01/20/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:4147

LOCAL RULES SUPERIOR COURT of CALIFORNIA, COUNTY of ORANGE DIVISION 3 CIVIL RULES

Case 1:18-cv PGG Document 1 Filed 10/24/18 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case: 1:18-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:1

PRE-DECREE OR PRE-FINAL ORDERS

Case 4:17-cv HSG Document 181 Filed 12/26/18 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Transcription:

Case 1:06-cv-03958 Document 26-1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION E360INSIGHT, LLC, an Illinois Limited Liability Company, and DAVID LINHARDT, an individual Plaintiffs, 06 CV 3958 v. Judge Kocoras THE SPAMHAUS PROJECT, Magistrate Judge Brown a company limited by guarantee and organized under the laws of England, aka THE SPAMHAUS PROJECT LTD, Jury Demanded Defendant. PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR RULE TO SHOW CAUSE FOR DEFANDANT S VIOLATION OF COURT S ORDER OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION Plaintiffs, e360insight, LLC and David Linhardt (collectively Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, Synergy Law Group, LLC, respectfully requests that this court issue a rule to show cause why Defendant The Spamhaus Project, aka The Spamhaus Project Ltd., (Defendant, should not be held in contempt for its failure to comply with the Court s Order of September 13, 2006 for Permanent Injunction. In support of this motion Plaintiffs state: 1. On September 13, 2006 this Court, issued an Order of Default Judgment and a Permanent Injunction against Defendant (the Order. 2. Defendant has not complied with the Order. 3. The judgment and order were communicated to Defendant by a variety of means and Defendant acknowledged the judgment and Order, including email directed to

Case 1:06-cv-03958 Document 26-1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 2 of 5 counsel for Plaintiffs and making several statements to the press and within online newsgroups. See attached Group Exhibit A, quotations from Mr. Steve Linford, Director of Defendant. 4. Mr. Linford s responses are that Defendant is not required to comply with the Order, as Defendant is not subject to the jurisdiction of this Court. 5. Mr. Linford s claims with respect to jurisdiction are wholly without merit because Defendant appeared through its attorneys in this matter, removed the case to federal court, markets its business to ISP s in Illinois and elsewhere in the United States, committed torts against Plaintiff in Illinois, uses an Internet domain name registered in and governed by the laws of the United States, prints its prices on its website in US dollars, has its site hosted using computer servers in the United States, collects its money through a US sourced payment agent, and perhaps most importantly did not even contest jurisdiction over Defendant when appearing and subjecting Defendant to the Court s jurisdiction. 6. The failure to comply with the Order of the Court is continuing to wrongfully damage Plaintiffs, as at least 84,622 internet domains use Spamhaus technology to wrongfully block email sent by Plaintiffs. 7. On information and belief, Spamhaus earns revenue of approximately $1,800,000 from the improper blocking of Plaintiffs email messages (see Linhardt affidavit. 8. Plaintiffs respectfully request that a Rule to Show Cause be issued against Defendant for its failure to comply with the Order, specifically by Defendant s failure to take any action to comply with the Order in any way and flaunting its disregard for this Court and the court system of the United States. 2

Case 1:06-cv-03958 Document 26-1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 3 of 5 9. As evidenced from the accompanying Affidavit of David Linhardt (attached as Exhibit B, Spamhaus has not complied with the Order and continues to cause damage to Plaintiffs. 10. Furthermore, as is shown by additional accompanying affidavits (attached as a group Exhibit C, Defendants over-reaching, overly-broad, and heavy handed tactics continue to be marketed and used in the United States and continue to interfere in the legitimate commerce of the United States. 11. By this Motion, Plaintiffs e360 and David Linhardt respectfully request that the Court issue a Rule to Show Cause why Defendant, The Spamhaus Project, aka The Spamhaus Project Ltd., should not be held in contempt for its failure to comply with the Order for Permanent Injunction entered by this Court. 12. Because Defendant has failed to comply with the Order, and because Defendant has made various statements indicating it will not comply with the Order, Plaintiffs respectfully request that Defendant s United States Internet domain name www.spamhaus.org be ordered to be suspended until such time as Defendant complies with the Order. 13. Further, should Defendant fail to comply with the Order within three (3 days from the date of entry hereof, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court order that accessing Defendant s technology within the United States to be improper and unlawful until such time as Defendant complies with the Order. Should such enforcement be necessary, Plaintiff respectfully requests: (a that Plaintiff s attorneys be allowed to notify any ISP s known to be using Defendant s technology for the improper purposes and contrary to the Order informing such ISP s of the improper nature of such continued use, and, if necessary, (b grant Plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint within this action 3

Case 1:06-cv-03958 Document 26-1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 4 of 5 to name any non-complying ISPs as additional defendants in this case, and further allowing Plaintiffs to seek an immediate TRO, without notice or bond, expedited discovery and an expedited hearing for a preliminary injunction against such non-complying ISP s. 14. The Court should also sanction Defendant The Spamhaus Project, aka The Spamhaus Project Ltd., in a manner deemed appropriate by the Court, including a per diem monetary sanction for each day of Defendant s continued non-compliance, for its failure to abide by the terms of the Court s Order. Respectfully submitted, E360Insight, LLC and David Linhardt By: /s/ Joseph L. Kish One of Their Attorneys Bartly J. Loethen Joseph L. Kish Kristen M. Lehner Synergy Law Group, LLC 730 West Randolph, 6 th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60661 Telephone: (312 454-0015 Facsimile: (312 454-0261 4

Case 1:06-cv-03958 Document 26-1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on September 29, 2006 I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern Division of Illinois using the CM/ECF system and served same by FedEx to: The Spamhaus Project Registered Office Communications House 26 York Street London, W1U 6PZ, England And by U.S. Mail to: Evan D. Brown Andrew B. Cripe Hinshaw and Culbertson 222 N. LaSalle Suite 300 Chicago, Illinois 60601 And by electronic mail to: Steve Linford, linford@spamhaus.org Synergy Law Group, LLC 730 West Randolph Street, 6 th Floor Chicago, IL 60661 (312 454-0015 Firm No. 38398 /s/ Joseph L. Kish Joseph L. Kish 5