Bass seems to have been elevated from a John Doe to a Real Person in the recent documents.
Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Defendants Amended Counterclaims against Plaintiffs and Memorandum of Law
-
-
Thanks Eric, it needs an incognito browsing window to come out correct, since I guess shared with everyone is not shared with any specific person (and I by eafult log in as myself).
Regards, THH
-
I interpret rather that they agree not to "conclude" or "insinuate", and just play the naive believer , letting justice investigate .
-
Bass seems to have been elevated from a John Doe to a Real Person in the recent documents.
So much for the "IH is so sophisticated they would have definitely found Bass if he existed" shtick.
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
-
So much for the "IH is so sophisticated they would have definitely found Bass if he existed" shtick.
Does it occur to you they might have found him? That would be sophisticated. -
IH Fanboy wrote:
So much for the "IH is so sophisticated they would have definitely found Bass if he existed" shtick.
Jed wrote:
Does it occur to you they might have found him? That would be sophisticated.Just couldn't resist the poke Jed. The shtick was not "IH will eventually find him," but rather, the former.
But hey, we're all here because we share a common interest. So when I poke, it is with at least a tinge of comradery.
-
dear Colleagues,
See please the three new item 47, 48 and 49 at the
Pacemonitor of the Miami Court.
No 49- those of you who are connected in a way to IH, can you tell what has Cherokee et al withdrawn and especially WHY?
Thank you,
peter -
Peter,
reading the documents it looks pretty clear.
45 – Amended answer – Just now allowed by Court
41,39,46 (Rossi trying to stop this etc) – denied
49 - IH withdraws motion for summary judgement because they have been allowed to amend their answer (which with the plaintiff's complaint/ reply would be judged). This withdrawal is unopposed (how could it be opposed!).
I guess Rossi gets another chance to amend his reply, and then I'd expect another motion for summary judgement.
this Court stuff will take a long time and much of it be irrelevant fluff - for example of the many different defences from IH only one needs to succeed, and they cannot ALL be true - being internally inconsistent as is normal.
But I have to say IH looks to be in a good place here based on the relative coherence and substance of their arguments versus Rossi's so far.
-
Quote from IHFB
But hey, we're all here because we share a common interest. So when I poke, it is with at least a tinge of comradery.
This is a new one to me: a comradery troll? ("Poking" is what trolls do, designed to inflame feelings, or score PR points, rather than illuminate facts).
-
This is a new one to me: a comradery troll? ("Poking" is what trolls do, designed to inflame feelings, or score PR points, rather than illuminate facts).
They are gentle pokes. And there will likely be more to come. It is important, I think, to remind people of strong positions they have taken in the past, which turn out to be fleeting. It helps illuminate how one might approach similar situations in the future.
-
Anyone willing to buy the transcript of the discovery hearing?
-
Is the transcript up? It was an empty placeholder earlier.
-
I think the transcript could tell us a lot.
Could someone call the court and try to find out when the transcript will be available for purchase?
-
Could someone call the court and try to find out when the transcript will be available for purchase?
Notice that the phone number of the Court Reporter is available in what PACER provides. But it is possible that one could obtain it, but that distribution -- publication on-line of the contents -- would be prohibited. Read that notice carefully! The document may be redacted at the request of parties.
