Mickey Chandler's SpamSuite

The end of this case has finally happened.

What we have here are the settlement documents, which, significantly, are not sealed.

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, and

After denying e360's attempt to reboot this case, Judge Zagel decided to review all of the non-routine matters (in other words, substantive rulings). The following is his decision concerning the merits of e360's request to get a mulligan: "Having reviewed each of these rulings, the court finds no compelling reason to revisit them.

Can you say "grounds for appeal"?

I knew you could.

Judge Coar has denied e360's request to give the case a reboot. I think it's a good call on his part, but you can be certain that e360 will seek to get this decision overturned, probably in an interlocutory appeal.

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

Here is e360's counter-argument to Comcast's response to their request that this case receive a reboot.

============================================
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

E360INSIGHT, LLC,
Plaintiff,

v.

COMCAST CORPORATION,
Defendant.
________________________________________

COMCAST CORPORATION,
Counterclaimant,

v.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

JOHN W. FERRON
Plaintiff,

vs.

E360Insight, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

MINUTE entry before the Honorable David H. Coar:Motion hearing held on 10/16/2008 regarding motion to vacate, 67 . Set deadlines/hearing as to motion to vacate, 67 : Responses due by 11/5/2008 (no reply). Motion Hearing set for 11/19/2008 at 09:00 AM. as to Motion to vacate.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable David H. Coar:Motion hearing held on 10/16/2008 regarding motion to vacate, 67 . Set deadlines/hearing as to motion to vacate, 67 : Responses due by 11/5/2008 (no reply). Motion Hearing set for 11/19/2008 at 09:00 AM. as to Motion to vacate.

Having lost their Motion to Dismiss, Linhardt and e360 have filed their Answer.

In a fun little read, they claim that "marketing is not solicitation" (paragraph 34), a lack of knowledge as to what they were doing (paragraph 46), and a lack of due process (paragraph 48).

Everyone has pretty much seen this one coming. E360Insight is asking the new judge to vacate all prior rulings in the case because of a conflict of interest.