SearchSupport the SiteOur SponsorsLinks and SupportersCopyrightExcept where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
All copyright interests in the legal filings contained herein are expressly disclaimed. Documents, opinions, and comments provided on any Spamsuite.com page are for general information purposes only and are not intended to substitute for informed professional legal advice. Spamsuite.com expressly disclaims liability for any opinion expressed in comments. Spamsuite.com does not endorse any article comment. |
MOTION for Leave to File Status ReportIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT e360 INSIGHT, LLC, an Illinois Limited Liability Company, and DAVID LINHARDT, an individual, v. THE SPAMHAUS PROJECT, a company limited by guarantee and organized under the laws of England, a/k/a THE SPAMHAUS PROJECT, LTD., DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE INSTANTER A STATUS REPORT ON SUGGESTED DEPOSITION Defendant The Spamhaus Project (“Spamhaus”),1 by and through its attorneys Jenner & Block LLP, respectfully moves this Court for the entry of an order granting Spamhaus leave to file instanter the 4-page Status Report attached as Exhibit A. In support of this motion, Spamhaus states that the parties have agreed that the voluntary telephonic deposition of Steve Linford should not proceed because Plaintiffs’ counsel was not interested in taking the deposition within the scope of Steve Linford’s offer to provide testimony. [1 Defendant expressly objects to this Court’s jurisdiction over The Spamhaus Project because Defendant is based solely in the United Kingdom and does not conduct or transact business in Illinois. Moreover, Defendant reserves its arguments based on Plaintiffs’ failure to properly effect service of process.] Because Your Honor suggested that Plaintiffs accept Steve Linford’s prior offer to sit for a telephonic deposition, Spamhaus respectfully desired to advise the Court, prior to the continued hearing date, that the deposition did not proceed and the reasons why it did not proceed. -2- THE SPAMHAUS PROJECT By: s/David Jiménez-Ekman _________ Craig C. Martin JENNER & BLOCK LLP Bookmark/Search this post with:
|
Upcoming DatesNavigatione360insight LLC, et al. v. The Spamhaus Project LLC, et al.User loginRecent comments
|
Post new comment