SpamSuite.com

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

E360INSIGHT, LLC,
Plaintiff,

v.

COMCAST CORPORATION,
Defendant.

COMCAST CORPORATION,
Counterclaimant,

v.

E360INSIGHT, LLC,
Counterdefendant,
DAVID LINHARDT,
MAVERICK DIRECT MARKETING
SOLUTIONS, INC.,
BARGAIN DEPOT ENTERPRISES, LLC,
d/b/a bargaindepot.net and
bargainshoppecorp.com,

Raise your hand if you're shocked by this one, but the Judge has denied e360Insight's Motion to Reconsider.

========================
MINUTE entry before Judge Honorable James B. Zagel: Motion to reconsider is denied.

MINUTE entry before Judge Charles P. Kocoras: Motion hearing held on 4/29/2008. Defendant's motion to compel complete discovery responses and for an extension of time to complete discovery is granted. Plaintiffs are given to 5/13/2008 to comply with discovery requests. Status hearing and the discovery cut-off date are reset from 5/6/2008 to 8/5/2008 at 9:30 a.m.

When a federal district court judge says that a bunch of people might call you a spammer, then your honor must be defended!

And so e360Insight, LLC, is asking the judge to pretty please take that back and let them have a case and discovery.

Here is a Motion to Compel filed by Spamhaus. There's some interesting stuff here.

1) Mr. Linhardt blew off a deposition in January. Meaning that the deposition was properly noticed, but he just failed to show up. No reason for his non-appearance seems to have been provided. This is most definitely NOT a good thing for the judge to be finding out from e360's viewpoint.

The following is the text of a letter sent to the Solicitor General by the 9th Circuit.

David Linhardt, and his various sock puppets, are now trying to dismiss Comcast's countersuit and 3rd party complaints. Among the complaints he makes is that Comcast did not attach even one single email to the complaint. That strikes me as a dangerous demand to make. I think that he could end up with reams of paper as a result. But, we'll have to wait and see.

I debated how many of these documents to OCR and put up text versions of. Ultimately, I've decided to just do this one. The actual motion to dismiss merely states that it is a motion to dismiss and refers the court to this document and the affidavit. The affidavit merely restates things that you can read here. So, this one it is.

=======================================

The State of North Dakota has moved to dismiss the criminal Computer Fraud charges against David Ritz. The judge in the case has NOT yet signed the motion, to my knowledge.

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,

v.

THE SPAMHAUS PROJECT,
a company limited by guarantee and
organized under the laws of England, aka
THE SPAMHAUS PROJECT LTD,
Defendant.

AGREED PROTECTIVE ORDER