Veoxo, Inc. et al v. Vyasil, LLC et al
Plaintiff: GMAX, Inc., Veoxo, Inc., Justin London and Linkepic, Inc.
Defendant: Vyasil, LLC, Mehul Vyas, Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom, Hemang Vyas, Ryan Tannehill an individual doing business as RMT Enterprises and Vyasil, LLC a California company doing business as eWittas
Respondent: Sperling & Slater, PC
Case Number: 1:2012cv09058
Filed: November 9, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Office: Chicago Office
County: Cook
Presiding Judge: Edmond E Chang
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 2, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 2, 2020 Filing 489 ENTERED JUDGMENT Signed by the courtroom deputy on 10/02/2020. Emailed notice (mw, )
October 2, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 488 ORDER Signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 10/02/2020. For the reasons stated in the Order, the Plaintiffs' motion for default judgment #466 is granted in part and denied in part. Total damages are awarded against Defendant Mehul Vyas in the amount of $923,476.18 plus statutory prejudgment interest. A separate AO-450 judgment shall be entered. The status hearing of 10/09/2020 is vacated. Civil case terminated. Emailed notice (mw, )
October 2, 2020 Filing 487 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Pursuant to the stipulated dismissal, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), the case is dismissed with prejudice as to Defendants Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom, and Ryan Tannehill, each side to bear its own fees and costs. Emailed notice (mw, )
October 1, 2020 Filing 486 STIPULATION of Dismissal (London, Justin)
September 24, 2020 Filing 485 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On review of the status report #484 , the Court extends the deadline to file the stipulated dismissal to 10/05/2020. The tracking status hearing of 09/25/2020 is reset to 10/09/2020 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Emailed notice (mw, )
September 22, 2020 Filing 484 STATUS Report Joint by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London (London, Justin)
September 22, 2020 Filing 483 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Plaintiffs and Defendants Wittstrom, Tannehill, and Vyasil LLC were supposed to file the stipulated dismissal on 09/21/2020, but it was not filed. The parties shall file a status report by 09/23/2020. Emailed notice (mw, )
August 23, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 482 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/23/2020: For the reasons explained in the Order, the motion #457 #465 to enforce is granted in part and denied in part. As set forth in the Order, the defense's modification, execution, and transmittal of the final agreement is due by 09/02/2020. London shall return the executed agreement by 09/14/2020, and the parties shall file the stipulated dismissal by 09/21/2020. To track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called), the status hearing of 09/11/2020, is reset to 09/25/2020 at 8:30 a.m. Emailed notice(Chang, Edmond)
August 12, 2020 Filing 481 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Court still has the pending motions #457 , #465 , #466 under advisement. Status hearing of 08/14/2020 is reset to 09/11/2020 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Emailed notice (mw, )
July 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 480 ORDER Fifth Amended General Order 20-0012 IN RE: CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 PUBLIC EMERGENCY Signed by the Chief Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on July 10, 2020. This Order does not extend or modify any deadlines set in civil cases. No motions may be noticed for in-person presentment; the presiding judge will notify parties of the need, if any, for a hearing by electronic means or in-court proceeding. See attached Order. Signed by the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on 7/10/2020: Mailed notice. (Clerk3, Docket)
July 8, 2020 Filing 479 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The pending motions #457 , #465 , #466 remain under advisement. Status hearing of 07/10/2020 is reset to 08/14/2020 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Emailed notice (mw, )
June 16, 2020 Filing 478 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Court still has the pending motions #457 , #465 , #466 under advisement, so the status hearing of 06/19/2020 is reset to 07/10/2020 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Emailed notice (mw, )
June 4, 2020 Filing 477 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Court has the pending motions #457 , #465 , #466 under advisement, so the status hearing of 06/08/2020 is reset to 06/19/2020 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Mailed notice (mw, )
May 26, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 476 ORDER ORDER Fourth Amended General Order 20-0012 IN RE: CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 PUBLIC EMERGENCY Signed by the Chief Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on May 26, 2020. This Order does not extend or modify any deadlines set in civil cases. For non-emergency motions, no motion may be noticed for presentment on a date earlier than July 15, 2020. See attached Order. Signed by the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on 5/26/2020: Mailed notice. (docket1, )
April 24, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 475 ORDER Third Amended General Order 20-0012 IN RE: CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 PUBLIC EMERGENCY Signed by the Chief Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on April 24, 2020. All open cases are impacted by this Third Amended General Order. Parties are must carefully review all obligations under this Order, including the requirement listed in paragraph number 5 to file a joint written status report in most civil cases. See attached Order. Signed by the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on 4/24/2020: Mailed notice. (docket1, )
April 3, 2020 Filing 474 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In light of Second Amended General Order 20-0012, the status hearing of 04/15/2020 is reset to 06/08/2020 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (mw, )
March 30, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 473 ORDER Seconded Amended General Order 20-0012 IN RE: CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 PUBLIC EMERGENCY Signed by the Chief Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on March 30, 2020. All open cases are impacted by this Second Amended General Order. Amended General Order 20-0012, entered on March 17, 2020, and General Order 20-0014, entered on March 20, 2020, are vacated and superseded by this Second Amended General. See attached Order for guidance.Signed by the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on 3/30/2020: Mailed notice. (docket12, )
March 16, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 472 ORDER Amended General Order 20-0012 IN RE: CORONAVIRUS COVID-19 PUBLIC EMERGENCY Signed by the Chief Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on March 16, 2020. All open cases are impacted by this Amended General Order. See attached Order for guidance.Signed by the Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer on 3/16/2020: Mailed notice. (docket1, )
January 9, 2020 Filing 471 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Court has the pending motions under advisement. Status hearing of 01/10/2020 is reset to 04/15/2020 at 8:30 a.m. Mailed notice (mw, )
January 8, 2020 Filing 470 Defendants' Position Statement Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion for Entry of a Sum Certain Judgement Against Mehul Vyas STATEMENT by Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom #466 (Friebus, David)(Docket Text Modified by Clerk's Office) Modified on 1/8/2020 (pk, ).
January 8, 2020 Filing 469 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to sealed response #468 , Sealed motion #457 , motion to enforce #465 , response in opposition to motion #467 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Friebus, David)
December 23, 2019 Filing 468 SEALED RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to SEALED MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to Enforce Settlement Agreement #457 (London, Justin)
December 23, 2019 Filing 467 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to enforce Settlement Agreement (redacted) #465 (redacted) (London, Justin)
December 22, 2019 Filing 466 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London for default judgment as to sum-certain entry against Mehul Vyas (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit Dahl Dep. Transcript, #8 Exhibit Cohen Dep. Transcript)(London, Justin)
December 18, 2019 Filing 465 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to enforce Settlement Agreement (redacted) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-B)(Friebus, David)
December 4, 2019 Filing 464 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants' motion #460 to seal the motion to enforce settlement agreement is granted in part. Discussion of the consideration and other confidential topics is properly sealed, but very often there is public disclosure of the scope of the release and, of course, case law. In other words, Defendants must reconsider what parts of the motion and exhibits can be publicly filed without harming appropriate confidentiality. Defendants shall file a public redacted version of the filings by 12/18/2019. On the motion #457 to enforce, Plaintiffs' response is due by 12/23/2019. By 12/18/2019, Plaintiffs shall provide the draft response to the defense to confer on whether they can agree on what should be redacted from a public filing of the response, and what should be kept under seal. (If agreement cannot be reached, then Plaintiffs shall include any redactions proposed by the defense in the public version.) The defense reply is due by 01/08/2020. The status hearing of 12/18/2019 is vacated, and instead the 01/10/2020 status hearing is reset to 9:45 a.m. on the same date. The default-judgment motion deadline remains in place. Emailed notice (slb, )
November 26, 2019 Filing 463 Amended NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion to seal #460 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/5/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
November 26, 2019 Filing 462 Amended NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of Sealed motion #457 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/5/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
November 26, 2019 Filing 461 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion to seal #460 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/4/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
November 26, 2019 Filing 460 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to seal Defendants' Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Friebus, David)
November 26, 2019 Filing 459 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of Sealed motion #457 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/4/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
November 26, 2019 Filing 458 SEALED EXHIBIT by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom Exhibits A-B regarding SEALED MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to Enforce Settlement Agreement #457 (Friebus, David)
November 26, 2019 Filing 457 SEALED MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Friebus, David)
November 18, 2019 Filing 456 SEALED TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 10/18/2019 before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. SEALED proceedings. Court Reporter Contact Information: Judith A. Walsh, CSR, RDR, F/CRR. Official Court Reporter. judith_walsh@ilnd.uscourts.gov. (Walsh, Judy)
November 18, 2019 Filing 455 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 10/18/2019 before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Open-court proceedings. Order Number: 36768. Court Reporter Contact Information: Judith A. Walsh, CSR, RDR, F/CRR. Official Court Reporter. judith_walsh@ilnd.uscourts.gov.

< Redaction Request due 12/9/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 12/19/2019. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 2/18/2020. (Walsh, Judy)
October 18, 2019 Filing 454 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Second session of the pretrial conference convened, but counsel reported that the parties have reached a settlement. The Court placed the material terms of the binding settlement agreement on the record under seal. By 10/23/2019, Defendants shall submit the first draft of the written settlement agreement to Plaintiffs. In light of the settlement, the trial date and all litigation deadlines are vacated. Status hearing set for 12/18/2019 at 10:00 a.m. By 12/23/2019, Plaintiffs shall file a motion for default judgment in a sum certain as to defaulted Defendant Mehul Vyas. To track the motion only (no appearance is required), a status hearing is set for 01/10/2020 at 8:30 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
October 16, 2019 Filing 453 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Pretrial conference held. The second session is set for 10/18/2019 at 11 a.m. An order summarizing the two sessions will be posted on the docket next week. Emailed notice (slb, )
October 16, 2019 Filing 452 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:Plaintiffs' motion #448 to file additional appearance is granted: Daniel Voelker may file his appearance. Emailed notice (slb, )
October 15, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 451 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 10/15/2019: On the bench trial, for the reasons stated in the Order, the parties' motions in limine #413 #415 are granted in part and denied in part, and reserved in part. Motion in limine as to Jeffrey Stec #420 is denied as moot. Emailed notice(eec)
October 15, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 449 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 10/15/2019: For the reasons discussed in the Order, the parties' motions in limine #412 #419 are granted in part and denied in part, as well as reserved in part. Issues for discussion at the pretrial conference are also flagged in this Order. Emailed notice(eec)
October 15, 2019 Filing 448 MOTION by Plaintiff GMAX, Inc. for leave to file Additional Appearance for Plaintiffs (Voelker, Daniel)
October 15, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 447 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 10/15/2019: For the reasons stated in the Order, the defense motion for leave to file #421 supplemental motions and to amend objections is granted. The Order also explains the decisions on Supplemental Motions 8 through 11, as well as why the Plaintiffs' motion to amend #423 is denied in large part, granted in part, and reserved in part.Emailed notice(eec)
October 11, 2019 Filing 450 LETTER from David Friebus dated 10/11/2019. (ph, )
October 10, 2019 Filing 446 LETTER from David M. Friebus dated 10/10/19. (cc, )
September 30, 2019 Filing 445 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to response to motion #426 to bar Jonathan Hochman (London, Justin)
September 30, 2019 Filing 444 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to response to motion #427 in limine (jury) (London, Justin)
September 30, 2019 Filing 443 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to response to motion #428 in limine (bench) (London, Justin)
September 30, 2019 Filing 442 REPLY by Defendant Vyasil, LLC to motion in limine #414 , response in opposition to motion, #429 (Friebus, David)
September 30, 2019 Filing 441 REPLY by Defendant Vyasil, LLC to motion in limine #413 , response to motion #428 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-B)(Friebus, David)
September 30, 2019 Filing 440 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to motion in limine #412 , response to motion #427 (Friebus, David)
September 25, 2019 Filing 439 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants' motion for reconsideration of the summary judgment decision #437 is denied. The summary judgment opinion was issued on 03/27/2019, R. 390, and it is passing strange that Defendants think that the Court would evaluate a reconsideration motion filed almost six months later, with the pretrial conference looming around three weeks from now and a slew of pretrial motions already pending. The defense is welcome to make Rule 50 motions at the appropriate time during and after trial.Emailed notice (eec)
September 25, 2019 Filing 438 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion for reconsideration #437 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/30/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
September 25, 2019 Filing 437 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for reconsideration (Friebus, David)
September 11, 2019 Filing 436 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to motion for leave to file #421 , response in opposition to motion, #432 (CORRECTED) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-H)(Friebus, David)
September 11, 2019 Filing 435 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to motion for leave to file #421 , response in opposition to motion, #432 (CORRECTED) (Friebus, David)
September 11, 2019 Filing 434 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to motion in limine #412 , response in opposition to motion, #432 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-H)(Friebus, David)
September 7, 2019 Filing 433 SUPPLEMENT to response in opposition to motion, #429 Dahl Opinion and Cost Estimate (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
September 6, 2019 Filing 432 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for leave to file Pre-Trial Materials Instanter #421 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
September 6, 2019 Filing 431 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendant Vyasil, LLCin limine (Bench Trial) #413 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
September 6, 2019 Filing 430 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstromin limine (Jury Trial) #412 (Attachments: #1 Declaration)(London, Justin)
September 6, 2019 Filing 429 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendant Vyasil, LLCin limine to Bar Opinion Testimony of Dr. Jordan Cohen, Dr. Deborah Dahl & Rick Reitz #414 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
September 6, 2019 Filing 428 RESPONSE by Vyasil, LLC to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin limine (bench trial) #415 (Friebus, David)
September 6, 2019 Filing 427 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin limine (jury trial) #419 (Friebus, David)
September 6, 2019 Filing 426 RESPONSE by Vyasil, LLC to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin limine #418 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-D)(Friebus, David)
September 4, 2019 Filing 425 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Motion hearing held on Defendants' motion for leave to file pre-trial materials #421 . The Court explained, on preliminary assessment, the various serious flaws in Plaintiffs' exhibit-list submissions. Plaintiffs' response to the motion due 09/06/2019. Defendants' reply due 09/11/2019Emailed notice (slb, )
August 29, 2019 Filing 424 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to amend/correct,, motion to supplement, #423 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/4/2019 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
August 29, 2019 Filing 423 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to amend/correct proposed pretrial order #417 , proposed pretrial order #416 , MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to supplement Proposed Pre-trial order (London, Justin)
August 29, 2019 Filing 422 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion for leave to file #421 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/4/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
August 29, 2019 Filing 421 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for leave to file Pre-Trial Materials Instanter (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-E)(Friebus, David)
August 23, 2019 Filing 420 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin limine bar testimony and report of Jeffrey Stec (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
August 23, 2019 Filing 419 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin limine (jury trial) (London, Justin)
August 23, 2019 Filing 418 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin limine (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
August 23, 2019 Filing 417 PROPOSED Pretrial Order (Jury Trial) (Friebus, David)
August 23, 2019 Filing 416 PROPOSED Pretrial Order (Bench Trial) (Friebus, David)
August 23, 2019 Filing 415 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin limine (bench trial) (London, Justin)
August 23, 2019 Filing 414 MOTION by Defendant Vyasil, LLCin limine to Bar Opinion Testimony of Dr. Jordan Cohen, Dr. Deborah Dahl & Rick Reitz (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-G)(Friebus, David)
August 23, 2019 Filing 413 MOTION by Defendant Vyasil, LLCin limine (Bench Trial) (Friebus, David)
August 23, 2019 Filing 412 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstromin limine (Jury Trial) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-E)(Friebus, David)
August 5, 2019 Filing 411 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:On the defense extension motion #409 to file pretrial materials, Plaintiffs' counsel emailed the courtroom deputy, with a copy to defense counsel, to report that he will be out of the country from 09/07-09/21 with limited online access. The extension motion is granted in part as follows: the proposed pretrial order and motions in limine are due by 08/23/2019. The responses are due by 09/06/2019. Replies are due by 09/30/2019. This schedule cannot be extended. Emailed notice (slb, )
August 1, 2019 Filing 410 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of extension of time #409 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/6/2019 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
August 1, 2019 Filing 409 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to File Pre-Trial Materials (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Friebus, David)
July 22, 2019 Filing 408 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: At the request of the Court, and after confirming the parties' counsel availability, the pretrial conference is reset from 10/15/2019 to 10/16/2019 at 1 p.m. The Court appreciates the parties' accommodation. Emailed notice (slb, )
July 15, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 407 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 7/15/2019: For the reasons stated in the Order, Plaintiffs' motion to modify #401 the trial plan is denied. The next in-court date is the pretrial conference on 10/15/2019, but the parties should continue to make progress on the extensive work needed to complete the proposed pretrial order.Emailed notice(eec)
June 27, 2019 Filing 406 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:On review of the parties' settlement positions, see R. 405, no settlement conference will be convened at this time. But the Court might engage each side ex parte to discuss the settlement positions to evaluate further whether a conference should be convened. The Court will contact the parties separately if it decides to do that. The tracking status of 06/28/2019 is vacated. Emailed notice (slb, )
June 19, 2019 Filing 405 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. As discussed during the hearing, Plaintiffs' motion to allow remote video testimony for certain witnesses #397 is denied, but without prejudice if specific circumstances arise. Plaintiffs' motion to modify proposed trial plan #401 is taken under advisement, but the parties shall continue to prepare under the current plan. Counsel for both sides reported on the status of settlement. By 06/26/2019 each side shall email to Judge Chang's Proposed Order email account their position on settlement. To track the settlement-position report only, a status hearing (no appearance is required) is set for 06/28/2019 at 8:30 a.m. Otherwise, the next in-court date is the pretrial conference.Emailed notice (slb, )
May 30, 2019 Filing 404 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to response to motion #399 to allow video testimony (London, Justin)
May 29, 2019 Filing 403 NOTICE by John Michael Touhy of Change of Address (Touhy, John)
May 29, 2019 Filing 402 NOTICE by David Michael Friebus of Change of Address (Friebus, David)
May 28, 2019 Filing 401 MOTION to Modify Proposed Trial Plan by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London (London, Justin). (Docket text modified by the Clerk's Office) Modified on 5/29/2019 (mc, ).
May 28, 2019 Filing 400 Defendants' Position on Proposed Trial Plan by Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom (Friebus, David)
May 24, 2019 Filing 399 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonallow remote video testimony for certain witnesses #397 (Friebus, David)
May 12, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 398 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/12/2019: This Order explains the revised trial plan, and explains why Plaintiffs' motion #396 to hold jury trial on damages against Vyasil is denied. The parties shall file separate position papers to respond to the trial plan by 05/28/2019. Emailed notice(Chang, Edmond)
May 6, 2019 Filing 397 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonallow remote video testimony for certain witnesses (London, Justin)
May 6, 2019 Filing 396 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonjury trial to determine damages against Vyasil (London, Justin)
April 24, 2019 Filing 395 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. The Court discussed with the parties the scope and nature of the trial. During the hearing, the Court set a jury trial date solely as to individual Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill on the fraud claims. The dates and deadlines still apply, as summarized in this docket entry -- but the Court is reconsidering whether to include the veil-piercing claims against Wittstrom and Tannehill, as well as the damages prove-up as to Vyasil LLC. An order will be posted addressing those issues. Jury trial set for 11/04/2019. For now, the Court will set aside 12 days for trial, including jury selection, jury addresses, and jury deliberations. But after the filing of the proposed pretrial order, when the Court has a firmer sense of the reasonable limit, the Court will set presumptive time limits on the number of exam hours for each side, and the limit might very well be less than what 12 days would provide. ******As warned during the hearing, the parties shall immediately notify witnesses promptly and serve subpoenas as needed to ensure trial availability.****** The proposed pretrial order (see Judge Chang's website for the very detailed requirements) and motions in limine are due 08/12/2019. Responses due 08/26/2019. Replies due 09/06/2019. Pretrial conference set for 10/15/2019 at 1:00 p.m. If Plaintiffs wish to present certain witnesses by remote-location video testimony, then Plaintiffs must file a Rule 43(a) motion by 05/10/2019. Defendants' response due 05/24/2019. Plaintiffs' reply due 05/31/2019. Separately, if Plaintiffs would like the jury to decide damages as to Vyasil (which is in default), then Plaintiffs must file a motion by 05/06/2019 with case law that Plaintiffs have a right to a jury trial as to Vyasil. Status hearing set for 06/19/2019 at 10:30 a.m.Emailed notice (slb, )
April 19, 2019 Filing 394 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. To provide additional time for the parties to confer on what the trial schedule should be, and the nature of the trial, status hearing reset for 04/24/2019 at 10:00 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
April 17, 2019 Filing 393 STATUS Report by Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom (Friebus, David)
April 17, 2019 Filing 392 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:Motion by Attorney Michael T. Werner to withdraw as attorney for Defendants #391 is granted. Emailed notice (slb, )
April 16, 2019 Filing 391 MOTION by Attorney Michael T. Werner to withdraw as attorney for Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom. No party information provided (Werner, Michael)
March 27, 2019 Filing 390 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. For the reasons stated in the Opinion, Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion for summary judgment #370 is granted on Plaintiffs' agency and promissory estoppel claims; granted insofar as Plaintiffs cannot hold Wittstrom directly liable (as distinct from conspiratorial liability) for forwarding Bill Swanson's business card to Vyas; and otherwise denied. Plaintiffs' motion #357 is denied in its entirety. The parties shall commence settlement negotiations immediately. At the next status hearing, the parties shall report on those discussions and otherwise be ready to set a trial date. Emailed notice(slb, )
March 27, 2019 Filing 389 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On consideration of Plaintiffs' motion to reconsider #351 , and the defense statement (basically saying there is no need to respond), R. 356, the motion is denied as to the reduction for Hochman's preparation time for the same reasons stated in R. 350 at 1-2 (including that he had to review three opposing expert reports). The motion is granted insofar as the defense was permitted to deduct Plaintiffs' redirect time on Plaintiffs' experts; the same deduction is authorized as to the defense redirect time as to their own expert. So the low-end estimate of 30 minutes shall be paid by the defense, not Plaintiffs. Emailed notice (slb, )
March 20, 2019 Filing 388 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The motions for summary judgment and reconsideration remain pending, so the status hearing of 03/21/2019 is reset to 04/19/2019 at 9:00 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
February 6, 2019 Filing 387 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In light of the pending motions, the status hearing of 02/07/2019 is reset to 03/21/2019 at 10:00 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
December 17, 2018 Filing 386 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Court still has the pending motions under advisement. Status hearing of 12/18/2018 is reset to 02/07/2019 at 8:30 a.m. Mailed notice (mw, )
November 8, 2018 Filing 385 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Motion by Attorney Suzanne M. Alton de Eraso to withdraw as attorney for Defendants #383 is granted. Emailed notice (slb, )
November 7, 2018 Filing 384 NOTICE of Motion by Suzanne Marie Alton de Eraso for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney #383 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 11/13/2018 at 08:30 AM. (Alton de Eraso, Suzanne)
November 7, 2018 Filing 383 MOTION by Attorney Suzanne M. Alton de Eraso to withdraw as attorney for Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom. No party information provided (Alton de Eraso, Suzanne)
September 5, 2018 Filing 382 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Court has the pending motions under advisement. Status hearing 09/06/2018 is reset to 12/18/2018 at 9:30 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
July 30, 2018 Filing 381 RESPONSE by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to response in opposition to motion, #374 Defendants' Response to "Plaintiffs' Statement of Facts in Addition to and in Opposition to Defendants' Statement of Facts" (Friebus, David)
July 30, 2018 Filing 380 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to response in opposition to motion, #374 Defendants' Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment (Friebus, David)
July 12, 2018 Filing 379 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London re Response #378 , response in opposition to motion #377 (London, Justin)
July 12, 2018 Filing 378 RESPONSE by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to response in opposition to motion, #374 Amended Answer to Def. SOF (London, Justin)
July 10, 2018 Filing 377 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Karl Wittstrom, Ryan Tannehill for summary judgment #370 AMENDED (London, Justin)
July 9, 2018 Filing 376 NOTICE by All Plaintiffs re response in opposition to motion, #374 , supplement #375 (London, Justin)
July 9, 2018 Filing 375 SUPPLEMENT to response in opposition to motion, #374 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
July 9, 2018 Filing 374 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Karl Wittstrom, Ryan Tannehill for summary judgment #370 (Attachments: #1 Supplement Answer, #2 Supplement Add SOF, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C, #5 Exhibit D, #6 Exhibit E, #7 Exhibit F, #8 Exhibit Exhibit G, #9 Exhibit H, #10 Exhibit I, #11 Exhibit J, #12 Exhibit K)(London, Justin)
June 11, 2018 Filing 373 RULE 56 56.1(a)(3) & 56.1(b)(3) Statement by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom regarding motion for summary judgment #370 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Tab 1, #2 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 1, #3 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 2, #4 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 3, #5 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 4, #6 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 5, #7 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 6, #8 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 7, #9 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 8, #10 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 9, #11 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 10, #12 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 11, #13 Exhibit Tab 2 - Part 12, #14 Exhibit Tab 3, #15 Exhibit Tab 4, #16 Exhibit Tab 5, #17 Exhibit Tab 6, #18 Exhibit Tab 7, #19 Exhibit Tab 8, #20 Exhibit Tab 9, #21 Exhibit Tab 10, #22 Exhibit Tab 11, #23 Exhibit Tab 12, #24 Exhibit Tab 13, #25 Exhibit Tab 14 - Part 1, #26 Exhibit Tab 14 - Part 2, #27 Exhibit Tab 14 - Part 3, #28 Exhibit Tab 14 - Part 4, #29 Exhibit Tab 14 - Part 5, #30 Exhibit Tab 14 - Part 6, #31 Exhibit Tab 14 - Part 7, #32 Exhibit Tab 14 - Part 8, #33 Exhibit Tab 15, #34 Exhibit Tab 16, #35 Exhibit Tab 17, #36 Exhibit Tab 18, #37 Exhibit Tab 19, #38 Exhibit Tab 20, #39 Exhibit Tab 21)(Friebus, David)
June 11, 2018 Filing 372 RESPONSE by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to motion for summary judgment, #357 Local Rule 56.1(a)(3) Statement of Facts (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Tab 1, #2 Exhibit Tab 2, #3 Exhibit Tab 3, #4 Exhibit Tab 4, #5 Exhibit Tab 5, #6 Exhibit Tab 6, #7 Exhibit Tab 7, #8 Exhibit Tab 8, #9 Exhibit Tab 9)(Friebus, David)
June 11, 2018 Filing 371 MEMORANDUM by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom in support of motion for summary judgment, #357 , motion for summary judgment #370 (Friebus, David)
June 11, 2018 Filing 370 MOTION by Defendants Karl Wittstrom, Ryan Tannehill for summary judgment (Friebus, David)
June 7, 2018 Filing 369 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants' motion #365 for extra pages is granted: the response may use 20 pages. Emailed notice (slb, )
June 6, 2018 Filing 368 (AMENDED) NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion for leave to file excess pages #365 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 6/11/2018 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
June 6, 2018 Filing 367 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Vyasil, LLC by Suzanne Marie Alton de Eraso (Alton de Eraso, Suzanne)
June 5, 2018 Filing 366 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion for leave to file excess pages #365 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 6/11/2018 at 09:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
June 5, 2018 Filing 365 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for leave to file excess pages (Friebus, David)
June 5, 2018 Filing 364 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by Suzanne Marie Alton de Eraso (Alton de Eraso, Suzanne)
May 14, 2018 Filing 363 SUPPLEMENT to motion for summary judgment, #357 (Attachments: #1 Supplement)(London, Justin)
May 14, 2018 Filing 362 SUPPLEMENT to motion for summary judgment, #357 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
May 11, 2018 Filing 361 SUPPLEMENT to motion for summary judgment, #357 (London, Justin)
May 11, 2018 Filing 360 SUPPLEMENT to motion for summary judgment, #357 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit C)(London, Justin)
May 11, 2018 Filing 359 SUPPLEMENT to motion for summary judgment, #357 (Attachments: #1 Supplement Tannehill Dep II, #2 Supplement Wittstrom Dep I, #3 Supplement Wittstrom Dep II)(London, Justin)
May 11, 2018 Filing 358 NOTICE by All Plaintiffs re MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for summary judgment #357 (London, Justin)
May 11, 2018 Filing 357 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for summary judgment (Attachments: #1 Supplement Statements of Facts, #2 Supplement Memorandum of Law, #3 Exhibit Exhibit A, #4 Exhibit Exhibit B, #5 Exhibit Exhibit D, #6 Exhibit Exhibit E, #7 Exhibit Exhibit F, #8 Exhibit G)(London, Justin)
April 13, 2018 Filing 356 Statement Regarding Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration by Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom (Friebus, David)
April 10, 2018 Filing 355 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:On review of the status report, the Court adopts a 4-brief schedule: Plaintiffs shall file the opening brief on 05/11/2018. Defendants shall file a combined response and cross-motion on 06/11/2018. Plaintiffs shall file a a combined reply and response by 07/09/2018. Defendants shall reply by 07/30/2018. On Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration #351 , the defense shall respond by 04/17/2018. Plaintiffs may reply by 04/24/2018. The status hearing of 04/11/2018 is reset to 09/06/2018 at 9:00 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
April 9, 2018 Filing 354 STATUS Report (Joint) by Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom (Friebus, David)
April 3, 2018 Filing 353 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiff's attorney, Justin London, called the courtroom deputy to request a continuance of the status and motion hearing in light of a severe illness. The hearings are reset to 04/11/2018 at 11:30 a.m., but the parties should confer and propose a summary judgment briefing schedule in a status report by 04/09/2018. Emailed notice (slb, )
April 1, 2018 Filing 352 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for reconsideration #351 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/4/2018 at 10:00 AM. (London, Justin)
April 1, 2018 Filing 351 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London for reconsideration regarding order on motion for miscellaneous relief,,,, order on motion to compel,,, #350 (London, Justin)
March 31, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 350 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 3/31/2018: For the reasons stated in the Order, the defense motion #328 to litigate damages first is denied; the defense motion to compel expert fees #330 is granted in part and denied in part; and Plaintiffs' motion to compel #334 is denied. At the next status hearing, the Court will set the summary judgment briefing schedule. Emailed notice.(eec)
February 8, 2018 Filing 349 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In light of the pending motions, the status hearing of 02/09/2018 is reset to 04/04/2018 at 10:00 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
December 12, 2017 Filing 348 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:R. 347 was intended for another case and was entered in error. The Court has the following motions under advisement: the defense motion #328 to litigate damages, the defense motion #330 to compel a share of expert fees, and Plaintiffs' motion #334 for fees and to compel. The status hearing of 12/13/2017 is reset to 02/09/2018 at 11:00 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
November 1, 2017 Filing 347 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In view of the 11/21/2017 status hearing with the magistrate judge, the status hearing with Judge Chang on 11/07/2017 is reset to 12/13/2017 at 9:45 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
October 11, 2017 Filing 346 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Attorney David Freibus called chambers, without objection from opposing counsel, to request that the 10/19/2017 status hearing be reset to one day day earlier due to a scheduling conflict. But the Court was going to reset the status hearing in light of its own schedule in any event. The status hearing of 10/19/2017 is reset to 11/07/2017 at 1:30 p.m. Mailed notice (ags, )
September 26, 2017 Filing 345 REPLY by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to Response, #343 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G)(London, Justin)
September 20, 2017 Filing 344 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to motion for miscellaneous relief #328 , response in opposition to motion #339 , response in opposition to motion, #340 (Friebus, David)
September 19, 2017 Filing 343 RESPONSE by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to motion to compel, #334 Expert Fees, Subpoenaed Documents, and Other Miscellaneous Relief (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10, #11 Exhibit 11, #12 Exhibit 12, #13 Exhibit 13)(Friebus, David)
September 13, 2017 Filing 342 REPLY by Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl WittstromDefendants' Motion To Compel Fees For Expert Discovery #330 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D)(Friebus, David)
September 13, 2017 Filing 341 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion #337 for extra pages is granted in part: as requested, Plaintiffs may use 20 pages when they file the summary judgment brief, but no summary judgment briefing schedule has been set yet, so Plaintiffs must wait until after decision on the defense motion #328 to first litigate damages as to Vyasil.Emailed notice (slb, )
September 12, 2017 Filing 340 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl WittstromDefendants' Motion To Set Case Management Schedule #328 Corrected Formatting of Dkt. 327 (London, Justin)
September 12, 2017 Filing 339 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl WittstromDefendants' Motion To Set Case Management Schedule #328 (London, Justin)
September 11, 2017 Filing 338 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for leave to file excess pages #337 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/14/2017 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
September 11, 2017 Filing 337 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London for leave to file excess pages of plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment (London, Justin)
September 8, 2017 Filing 336 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Plaintiffs' motion for fees and to compel #334 , the defense response is due by 09/19/2017. Plaintiffs' reply is due by 09/26/2017. Emailed notice (slb, )
September 5, 2017 Filing 335 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to compel, #334 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/12/2017 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
September 5, 2017 Filing 334 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to compel fees/offset, documents, and other relief (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit E.1, #7 Exhibit E.2, #8 Exhibit F, #9 Exhibit G, #10 Exhibit H, #11 Exhibit I, #12 Exhibit J)(London, Justin)
September 5, 2017 Filing 333 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl WittstromDefendants' Motion To Compel Fees For Expert Discovery #330 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit C.1, #5 Exhibit C.2, #6 Exhibit D, #7 Exhibit E, #8 Exhibit F, #9 Exhibit G, #10 Exhibit H, #11 Exhibit I, #12 Exhibit J, #13 Exhibit K, #14 Exhibit L, #15 Exhibit M)(London, Justin)
August 23, 2017 Filing 332 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On the defense motion #328 to litigate Vyasil damages, Plaintiffs' response due by 09/13/2017. Plaintiffs' response should also include, assuming that Plaintiffs object, whether Plaintiffs intend to file a dispositive motion or instead is ready for a trial date. The defense may reply by 09/20/2017; the reply too shall address whether, if the Vyasil-first motion is denied, the defense intends to file a dispositive motion or instead is ready for a trial date. On the defense motion for payment of share of expert fees #330 . Plaintiffs shall respond by 09/06/2017. The defense may reply by 09/13/2017. The status hearing of 08/24/2017 is reset to 10/19/2017 at 10:00 a.m.Emailed notice (slb, )
August 21, 2017 Filing 331 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief, #330 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/24/2017 at 10:15 AM. (Friebus, David)
August 21, 2017 Filing 330 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl WittstromDefendants' Motion To Compel Fees For Expert Discovery (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F)(Friebus, David)
August 21, 2017 Filing 329 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief #328 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/24/2017 at 10:15 AM. (Friebus, David)
August 21, 2017 Filing 328 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl WittstromDefendants' Motion To Set Case Management Schedule (Friebus, David)
July 28, 2017 Filing 327 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: At Plaintiffs' request with objection, the status hearing of 08/09/2017 is reset for 08/24/2017 at 10:15 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
July 25, 2017 Filing 326 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Plaintiffs' counsel did not appear. The defense raised the possibility of litigating damages as to Vyasil, but that must be raised by motion filed before the next status hearing (and after conferring, or attempting to confer, with Plaintiffs). Status hearing reset for 08/09/2017 at 9:30 a.m.Emailed notice (slb, )
July 19, 2017 Filing 325 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Maria Valdez:Settlement conference held on 7/19/2017. Parties unable to reach a settlement agreement. All matters relating to the referral of this action having been resolved, the case is returned to the assigned judge. Mailed notice (lp, )
June 19, 2017 Filing 324 CONFIDENTIALITY Agreement Signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 6/19/2017:Emailed notice(slb, )
May 31, 2017 Filing 323 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants' motion for entry of a Confidentiality Agreement #313 is granted. Emailed notice (slb, )
May 30, 2017 Filing 322 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendant Vyasil LLC's motion to vacate default #309 is denied. First, Vyasil argues that the defect in the diversity-jurisdiction allegations in the original complaint, which prompted a jurisdictional inquiry by the Court, R. 8, renders service of process insufficient. Of course subject matter jurisdiction is not waivable, but diversity jurisdiction did in fact (and still does) exist (as Vyasil concedes), and the allegations for diversity jurisdiction were corrected in the amended complaint. R. 10. No case stands for the proposition that service of process must start all over again as to a defendant after a default is entered against the defendant simply because an amended complaint is filed afterwards (so long as it is the allegations in the *served* complaint that form the basis for the default on purported liability and the prove-up of any purported damages). And Vyasil does not satisfy even the most generous version of the "good cause" standard under Rule 55(c), in light of the years-long delay in trying to vacate the default. No other arguments raised by Vyasil are worthy of further discussion. This is not to say that whatever damages that Plaintiffs seek will be readily proved against Vyasil; indeed, the extent of damages has long been an obstacle for Plaintiffs to prove, including at a default prove-up. In any event, that can be decided at a later time. The status hearing of 06/01/2017 is reset to 07/25/2017 at 9:30 a.m. Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
May 22, 2017 Filing 321 REPLY by Defendant Vyasil, LLC to motion to set aside default #309 (Friebus, David)
May 10, 2017 Filing 320 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London re response in opposition to motion #319 to set aside default (London, Justin)
May 10, 2017 Filing 319 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin Londonin Opposition to MOTION by Defendant Vyasil, LLC to set aside default #309 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
April 25, 2017 Filing 318 STATUS Report (Joint) by Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom (Friebus, David)
April 14, 2017 Filing 317 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Defendant Vyasil LLC's motion to vacate default #309 , if practically speaking a successful settlement conference would likely moot the motion, then the parties may agree to suspend briefing until after the settlement conference. The parties shall confer and file a status report by 04/24/2017 on whether there is an agreement to suspend briefing; if there is an agreement, then briefing is suspended. If there is no agreement, then Plaintiffs' response is due by 5/10/2017. Vyasil LLC's reply is due by 05/20/2017. On Defendant Vyasil LLC's motion to adopt Rule 26(a) disclosures #311 , the motion is denied without prejudice until the motion to vacate is decided. To the extent that Vyasil LLC wanted to file the motion to show what it thinks is prompt action in connection with the motion to vacate, it has made its record. On the defense motion for protective order #313 , Plaintiff's response is due by 04/21/2017. If Plaintiff objects, then the defense reply is due by 04/28/2017. The motion hearings of 04/17/2017 are vacated. Emailed notice (slb, )
April 13, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 316 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Maria Valdez: Magistrate Judge Status hearing held on 4/13/2017. This case is set to 7/19/2017 at 2:00 p.m. in Courtroom 1041 for a Settlement Conference. Defendants oral motion for their party to appear by telephone is denied. Judge Valdez requires full compliance with the Court's Standing Order on Settlement Conference found on Judge Valdez's website available at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov, or the parties can contact courtroom deputy, Lisa Provine, at (312) 408-5135 for a copy. Failure to comply with the provisions of the Court's Standing Order may result in the unilateral cancellation of the settlement conference by the Court. Absent leave from the Court, cancellation will result if the Plaintiff fails to submit to chambers copies of the settlement letters four days prior to the settlement conference. Because of the volume of settlement conferences conducted by Judge Valdez, once a settlement conference date has been agreed upon, no continuance will be granted without a motion showing extreme hardship. Attorney Theodore Roosevelt Jamison is to file a withdrawal from the case. Mailed notice (mmy, )
April 12, 2017 Filing 315 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by Michael Thomas Werner (Werner, Michael)
April 11, 2017 Filing 314 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief #313 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/17/2017 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
April 11, 2017 Filing 313 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstromto Enter Confidentiality Agreement (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Friebus, David)
April 11, 2017 Filing 312 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief #311 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/17/2017 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
April 11, 2017 Filing 311 MOTION by Defendant Vyasil, LLCDefendant Vyasil's Motion for Leave to Adopt Wittstrom & Tannehill's Rule 26(a) Disclosures (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(Friebus, David)
April 11, 2017 Filing 310 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion to set aside default #309 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/17/2017 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
April 11, 2017 Filing 309 MOTION by Defendant Vyasil, LLC to set aside default (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G)(Friebus, David)
April 11, 2017 Filing 308 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Vyasil, LLC by Michael Thomas Werner (Werner, Michael)
April 11, 2017 Filing 307 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Vyasil, LLC by David Michael Friebus (Friebus, David)
April 11, 2017 Filing 306 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Vyasil, LLC by John Michael Touhy (Touhy, John)
March 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 305 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 3/31/2017: For the reasons stated in the Order, Plaintiffs' motion for sanctions #231 is denied. Emailed notice(Chang, Edmond)
March 21, 2017 Filing 304 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Maria Valdez:At the telephonic request of the parties, the status hearing set for 3/22/17 is hereby stricken and reset to 4/13/17 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1041. Mailed notice (lp, )
March 16, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 303 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Maria Valdez: This case has been referred to Judge Valdez to conduct a settlement conference. The parties are ordered to appear for status on 3/22/2017 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1041 to set a settlement conference date. The Parties are further directed to consult with their respective clients before the status date to determine the dates of unavailability for a settlement conference that may be set within the next eight to twelve weeks. Because of the volume of settlement conferences conducted by Judge Valdez, once a settlement conference date has been agreed upon, no continuance will be granted without a motion showing extreme hardship. Mailed notice (lp, )
March 14, 2017 Filing 302 Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Maria Valdez for the purpose of holding a settlement conference.(slb, )Emailed notice.
March 14, 2017 Filing 301 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Plaintiffs' counsel did not appear; he miscalendared it. With expert discovery closed except for a subpoena on which the parties will meet and confer, the Court will refer the case to the magistrate judge for a settlement conference. Status hearing set for 06/01/2017 at 9:00 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
February 20, 2017 Filing 300 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion to stay #298 expert discovery is denied. The motion refers to correspondence from **four years** ago, almost to the day, in which prior defense counsel raised the potential conflicts issue. R. 298-5. Yet this is the first time that the defense has raised the purported issue with the Court, and fact discovery closed on 06/27/2016. The change in defense counsel is not a sound basis to raise the issue so deep in the litigation. So expert discovery shall move ahead. If the defense wishes to re-open fact discovery on the conflicts issue, then they shall file a motion to do so, specifically explaining why there is good cause to re-open discovery, considering carefully whether such an assertion would be frivolous. That motion is due by 02/23/2017. If a motion is filed, then Plaintiff shall respond by 03/09/2017 and the defense may reply by 03/16/2017. Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
February 17, 2017 Filing 299 NOTICE of Motion by David Michael Friebus for presentment of motion to stay, #298 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 2/23/2017 at 08:30 AM. (Friebus, David)
February 17, 2017 Filing 298 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to stay expert discovery (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit H)(Friebus, David)
February 13, 2017 Filing 297 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In view of the defense filing, R. 296, which reports an agreement on the subpoena, Plaintiffs' motion to quash #290 is terminated without prejudice. As reported by the defense, Defendants agree to withdraw their subpoena to Dr. Dahl in exchange for Plaintiffs' agreement to provide to Defendants' counsel (no later than 02/16/2017): (i) the materials listed in Section 8 of Dr. Dahl's report; and (ii) the materials listed in Appendix A of the expert report of Dr. Jordan R. Cohen. Emailed notice (slb, )
February 10, 2017 Filing 296 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to quash subpoenaMOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London for protective order #290 (Friebus, David)
February 9, 2017 Filing 295 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: In view of the status report on Plaintiffs' motion to quash #290 , the defense response is due by 5 p.m. on 02/10/2017.Emailed notice (slb, )
February 9, 2017 Filing 294 STATUS Report on Plaintiffs' Motion to Quash by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom (Friebus, David)
February 3, 2017 Filing 293 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Plaintiffs' motion to quash #290 , the defense shall respond by 12 p.m. on 02/09/2017. The motion hearing is reset from 02/06/2017 to 02/14/2017 at 10:00 AM. Given the late issuance of the subpoena, no extension is granted on the defense expert disclosures despite the pendency of this dispute. The parties would be well served to confer again to arriving at some agreement.Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
February 3, 2017 Filing 292 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion #284 to compel responses to expert-directed written discovery is denied. There might very well be situations where written discovery is a time-saving substitute for an expert deposition, but this is not one of them. A review of the proposed Interrogatories and Requests to Admit reveal that there are the equivalent of many dozens of questions, and in turn many of them would require follow-up anyway, which a deposition would allow for. E.g., Hochman Interr. No. 5 ("what specific evidence or facts do you have that the plaintiffs' companies would not have been successful?"). Some are argumentative. E.g., Hochman Interr. No. 22 ("In your experience, is it customary for software development companies to repeatedly admit and discuss that they are fucking over their clients.") The defense undoubtedly will object to many (perhaps all) of the requests on multiple grounds, and then Plaintiffs will no doubt object to the objections. Many of the actual attempts at answering the requests will likely draw objections from the Plaintiffs, seeking more specificity or fuller answers. Even if prior defense counsel agreed in general to accept written discovery in lieu of depositions, the agreement was not explicit and was given in a transition period for defense counsel (to be sure, this is not an excuse that the Court will generally accept, but it provides part of the context for this motion). The motion is denied. Plaintiffs may take the depositions of any defense experts by 03/10/2017. Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
February 2, 2017 Filing 291 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to quash, motion for protective order #290 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 2/6/2017 at 10:00 AM. (London, Justin)
February 2, 2017 Filing 290 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to quash subpoena, MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London for protective order (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(London, Justin)
February 1, 2017 Filing 289 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London re reply #288 (London, Justin)
February 1, 2017 Filing 288 REPLY by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to response to motion, #287 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F)(London, Justin)
January 26, 2017 Filing 287 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to compel written discovery responses #284 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D)(Friebus, David)
January 19, 2017 Filing 286 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Plaintiffs' motion to compel responses to discovery requests #284 , Defendants shall respond by 01/26/2017. Plaintiffs may reply by 02/03/2017. Motion hearing reset from 01/23/2017 to 02/06/2017 at 10:00 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
January 18, 2017 Filing 285 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to compel #284 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 1/23/2017 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
January 18, 2017 Filing 284 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to compel written discovery responses (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit Exhibit 3)(London, Justin)
January 17, 2017 Filing 283 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by David Michael Friebus (Friebus, David)
January 17, 2017 Filing 282 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by John Michael Touhy (Touhy, John)
January 17, 2017 Filing 281 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Motion hearing held on Defendants' motion for substitution of attorney #278 and Defendants' extension motion to complete expert discovery #276 . Plaintiff opposes both motions. The Court expressed grave concern over why there was no notice in the prior extension motion that Defendants were contemplating hiring new counsel; Defendants did not tell current counsel they were searching until one week before the filing of the first substitution motion. But over Plaintiff's objections and for the reasons discussed during the hearing, and with great reluctance, both motions [276 and 278] are granted. The precipitating cause of the delay was Attorney Bullard leaving his law firm for an in-house position, so some delay was inevitable, and the proposed schedule change does not extend the expert discovery deadline too long. Michael A. Maciejewski may withdraw his appearance on behalf of Defendants. John M. Touhy and David M. Friebus may file their appearances on behalf of Defendants. As the Court warned during the hearing, only the most extraordinary circumstances would justify another extension. Defendants shall disclose any responsive reports to Plaintiffs' expert on replacement cost and access by 02/10/2017. Defendants to depose Plaintiffs' experts, including on replacement cost and access, by 03/03/2017. The status hearing of 01/19/2017 is reset to 03/14/2017 at 9:30 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
January 13, 2017 Filing 280 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The defense extension motion #276 and the motion to substitute counsel #278 shall be heard at 9:15 a.m., rather than 8:30 a.m., on the same date, 01/17/2017. Emailed notice (slb, )
January 10, 2017 Filing 279 NOTICE of Motion by Michael Allen Maciejewski for presentment of (Maciejewski, Michael)
January 10, 2017 Filing 278 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to substitute attorney (Maciejewski, Michael)
January 10, 2017 Filing 277 NOTICE of Motion by Michael Allen Maciejewski for presentment of extension of time #276 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 1/17/2017 at 08:30 AM. (Maciejewski, Michael)
January 10, 2017 Filing 276 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to complete expert discovery (Maciejewski, Michael)
January 6, 2017 Filing 275 NOTICE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom re Response #274 (Maciejewski, Michael)
January 6, 2017 Filing 274 RESPONSE by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom (Maciejewski, Michael)
January 6, 2017 Filing 273 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The defense motion to substitute counsel #268 is denied without prejudice. The motion does not have a statement of conferral or a statement of Plaintiff's position, so the motion does not comply with the Court's Case Management Procedures.Emailed notice (slb, )
January 6, 2017 Filing 272 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiff's motion to compel #270 is denied, because Plaintiff has made these arguments in his reply brief on the motion for sanctions, so there is no need to bring a separate motion to seek excision of what he believes are inaccuracies or falsehoods in Defendant Wittstrom's filing. This order does not conclude one way or the other whether the filing satisfies Rule 11's reasonable-basis requirement or whether an ethical duty requires an amendment, but simply denies the unnecessary motion.Emailed notice (slb, )
January 4, 2017 Filing 271 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to compel #270 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 1/9/2017 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
January 4, 2017 Filing 270 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to compel and other relief (London, Justin)
January 4, 2017 Filing 269 NOTICE of Motion by Michael Allen Maciejewski for presentment of motion to substitute attorney #268 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 1/9/2017 at 08:30 AM. (Maciejewski, Michael)
January 4, 2017 Filing 268 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to substitute attorney (Maciejewski, Michael)
November 28, 2016 Filing 267 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Motion by Attorney Paul W. Bullard to withdraw as attorney for Ryan Tannehill and Karl Wittstron #263 is granted. Over the objection by Plaintiff, Defendants' motion for extension of the discovery schedule #265 is granted. Plaintiffs reported that they will be disclosing their expert report on replacement cost and access to files as scheduled on 11/30/2016. By 01/16/2017, Defendant shall take the deposition of any experts that are already disclosed. The responsive expert report to the 11/30/2016 report is due 01/30/2017. By 02/21/2017, Defendant shall take the depositions of the expert that Plaintiff discloses on 11/30/2016. Status hearing set for 01/19/2017 at 9:30 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
November 17, 2016 Filing 266 NOTICE of Motion by Michael Allen Maciejewski for presentment of extension of time #265 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 11/28/2016 at 10:30 AM. (Maciejewski, Michael)
November 17, 2016 Filing 265 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time (Maciejewski, Michael)
November 4, 2016 Filing 264 NOTICE of Motion by Michael Allen Maciejewski for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney #263 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 11/28/2016 at 10:30 AM. (Maciejewski, Michael)
November 4, 2016 Filing 263 MOTION by Attorney Paul W. Bullard to withdraw as attorney for Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom. No party information provided (Maciejewski, Michael)
October 23, 2016 Filing 262 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion to compel #227 forensic examination of Wittstrom's various electronic devices is denied. The sparse factual presentation by Plaintiffs does not show that Wittstrom deleted those particular communications in bad faith, and does not justify an intrusive examination of all of the content in all of Wittstrom's electronic communications, including (as Plaintiffs propose) for communications with Tannehill that do not involve Vyasil. The use of keyword searches in this context is cold comfort given the scope of what Plaintiffs propose and the mixture of personal communications with business. Separately, Plaintiffs have moved to modify the expert discovery deadline #253 , seeking time to disclose an expert report on the cost to replace Plaintiffs' systems. After reviewing the motion, response, and reply, as well as the attached exhibits, the motion is granted. Although the parties could have surfaced this dispute sooner in the expert discovery period, and indeed Plaintiffs could have sought their own analysis of the servers earlier, the content of the servers is an important point of contention in this lawsuit. Also, the defense expert report from Forensicon did refer to some files (aside from the Skype logs) as if the defense expert had retrieved them in a format that permitted the expert to execute them. E.g., R. 258-2 at 3 ("There are also.ASPX files which are used to create buttons, forms, and content on a website.") (Relatedly, the defense says that there are no other files to disclose, R. 258 at 2-3, but to be clear, the Court emphasizes that the defense is obligated to disclose any underlying native files in exactly the same way that the expert retrieved them; the defense contends that it has done that already.) On all other expert discovery (aside from the corporate-veil issue earlier bifurcated), the parties shall proceed on the original schedule, R. 225, so depositions must finish by 12/12/2016. On the costs of replacement of Plaintiffs' systems, Plaintiffs shall disclose their expert report by 11/30/2016. If Plaintiffs want to make another effort to disclose an expert report on the underlying files themselves (that is, a Plaintiffs' expert who is able to retrieve and to analyze them) or on the purported inaccessibility of the files (this discovery order is *not* the equivalent of the Court finding that the files are inaccessible), then Plaintiffs must do that simultaneous with the additional disclosure, that is, by 11/30/2016. The defense's responsive expert report, if any, is due by 12/30/2016. The status hearing of 10/24/2016 is reset to 11/28/2016 at 10:30 a.m. Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
October 21, 2016 Filing 261 AMENDED response in opposition to motion, #258 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E)(Bullard, Paul)
October 20, 2016 Filing 260 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London re reply to response to motion #259 (London, Justin)
October 20, 2016 Filing 259 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to response in opposition to motion, #258 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C)(London, Justin)
October 19, 2016 Filing 258 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstromin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London for leave to file amended status report #253 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E)(Bullard, Paul)
October 13, 2016 Filing 257 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London re reply #256 (London, Justin)
October 13, 2016 Filing 256 REPLY by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to notice of motion #251 sur reply (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
October 12, 2016 Filing 255 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: With regard to Plaintiffs' motion to file amended status report #253 , which is essentially a motion for relief as to expert discovery on the software code, the defense shall respond by 10/19/2016. Plaintiffs shall reply by 10/21/2016. The motion hearing of 10/13/2016 and status hearing of 10/26/2016 are both reset to coincide on 10/24/2016 at 10:30 a.m. With regard to Plaintiffs' motion to bifurcate expert discovery on veil piercing #229 , which is apparently an agreed motion with the defense, the Court grants the motion but without pre-approving that any expert discovery would be needed on that issue at all (whether the corporate form should be disregarded does not seem like the proper subject of expert testimony). Emailed notice (slb, )
October 10, 2016 Filing 254 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for leave to file #253 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 10/13/2016 at 11:00 AM. (London, Justin)
October 10, 2016 Filing 253 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London for leave to file amended status report (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
October 7, 2016 Filing 252 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Respondent Sperling and Slater's motion to file sur-reply #250 is granted, and the motion is accepted as the sur-reply. Plaintiffs may response to the sur-reply by 10/14/2016. The status hearing of 10/13/2016 is reset to 10/26/2016 at 10:00 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
October 6, 2016 Filing 251 NOTICE of Motion by Greg Shinall for presentment of motion for leave to file #250 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 10/12/2016 at 08:30 AM. (Shinall, Greg)
October 6, 2016 Filing 250 MOTION by Respondent Sperling & Slater, PC for leave to file Surreply in Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Sanctions against Sperling & Slater (Shinall, Greg)
October 3, 2016 Filing 249 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London re reply to response to motion #246 (London, Justin)
October 3, 2016 Filing 248 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London re reply to response to motion, #245 to sanctions (London, Justin)
October 3, 2016 Filing 247 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London re reply to response to motion #244 to Motion to Compel Forensic Exam (London, Justin)
October 3, 2016 Filing 246 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to response to motion, #240 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit Exhibit E)(London, Justin)
October 3, 2016 Filing 245 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to Response #242 to Motion for Sanctions (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit Exhibit E)(London, Justin)
October 3, 2016 Filing 244 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London to Response #241 to Motion to Compel Forensic Exam (London, Justin)
September 19, 2016 Filing 243 STATUS Report by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London (London, Justin)
September 19, 2016 Filing 242 RESPONSE by Defendant Karl Wittstrom to motion for sanctions, #231 (Bullard, Paul)
September 19, 2016 Filing 241 RESPONSE by Defendant Karl Wittstrom to motion to compel #227 forensic examination (Bullard, Paul)
September 16, 2016 Filing 240 RESPONSE by Sperling & Slater, PC to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for sanctions #231 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Doc. 130, #2 Exhibit Doc. 130-1, #3 Exhibit Doc. 112)(Shinall, Greg)
August 22, 2016 Filing 239 ATTORNEY Appearance for Respondent Sperling & Slater, PC by Greg Shinall (Shinall, Greg)
August 22, 2016 Filing 238 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The notice of motion #231 on the motion for sanctions is terminated because there is already a briefing schedule in place per R. 225.Emailed notice (slb, )
August 22, 2016 Filing 237 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion to compel #235 is denied without prejudice because the motion and the attached exhibit do not reflect sufficient conferral under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a) and Local Rule 37.1. Emailed notice (slb, )
August 17, 2016 Filing 236 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to compel #235 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/23/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
August 17, 2016 Filing 235 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to compel (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
August 17, 2016 Filing 234 AMENDED NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for sanctions, #231 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/23/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
August 17, 2016 Filing 233 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The notice of motion for Plaintiffs' motion to compel forensic examination #227 is terminated because a briefing schedule has already been set. On Plaintiffs' motion to bifurcate expert discovery #229 , the defense shall respond by 08/23/2016. Plaintiff may reply by 08/25/2016. But the parties must proceed for now with the current expert-discovery schedule in place. Emailed notice (slb, )
August 16, 2016 Filing 232 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for sanctions, #231 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/23/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
August 16, 2016 Filing 231 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for sanctions (Attachments: #1 Declaration Wittstrom First Decl., #2 Declaration Wittstrom Second Decl., #3 Declaration Wittstrom Third Decl., #4 Exhibit Wittstrom Fourth Decl., #5 Exhibit Ratzlaff Dep Excerpts, #6 Exhibit C. Wittstrom Dep Excerpts, #7 Declaration K. Wittstrom Video Dep Excerpts, #8 Wittstrom Dep Excerpts)(London, Justin)
August 15, 2016 Filing 230 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to bifurcate #229 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/18/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
August 15, 2016 Filing 229 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to bifurcate expert discovery (London, Justin)
August 15, 2016 Filing 228 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to compel #227 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/18/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
August 15, 2016 Filing 227 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to compel forensic examination (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Wittstrom Dep)(London, Justin)
July 8, 2016 Filing 226 AMENDED answer to complaint #172 and affirmative defenses (Bullard, Paul)
July 7, 2016 Filing 225 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held on 07/07/2016. Plaintiffs' motion to compel forensic examination and motion for sanctions to be filed by 08/23/2016. Defense responses due by 09/19/2016. Plaintiffs' replies by 10/03/2016. Both sides stated they will be making expert disclosures. Both sides' Rule 26(a)(2)(B) expert disclosures and reports are to be submitted by 09/12/2016. Any responsive reports by 10/11/2016. All expert depositions are to be taken by 12/12/2016. Experts are to be notified to block-out dates between 10/11/2016 and 12/12/2016 for taking of their depositions. Joint status report of depositions dates is to be filed by 09/19/2016. The parties are encourage to think again about trying to settle this case, especially before launching into expensive expert discovery. Defense counsel mentioned the possibility of reinstating Vyasil LLC's active corporate status and then moving to vacate default; the Court did not set a particular deadline, because the Rules require prompt action, and it is up to the defense to move as quickly as possible. Status hearing is set for 10/13/2016 at 11:00 a.m. Emailed notice. (pjg, )
July 6, 2016 Filing 224 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion to amend affirmative defenses #218 is granted. It is not clear from the parties briefing when the defense was given the settlement agreement with Hemang Vyas, so the timeliness of the motion is difficult to gauge. But it is not apparent, as Plaintiff's response argued, that the defense should have somehow inferred that there was a settlement from the otherwise silent dropping of Hemang Vyas from the original complaint via the filing of the amended complaint. Nor does Plaintiff's response articulate any prejudice (e.g., no additional discovery is needed) from the addition of the $9,500 setoff affirmative defense. Defendants shall file the amended affirmative defenses as a separate docket entry by 07/08/2016. The status hearing of 07/07/2016 remains in place.Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
June 28, 2016 Filing 223 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion to compel tax returns #184 is denied. First, the motion does not mention Defendant Tannehill (although the document request sought his returns too), so no basis is offered to enforce that document request. Second, with regard to Defendant Wittstrom, Plaintiffs argues that his personal tax returns are discoverable because (1) they would show his business sophistication in light of the business interests likely reported on the returns; and (2) the absence of a reference to Vyasil would provide impeachment as to dishonesty because Wittstrom failed to report it to the IRS. On the first point, obtaining personal tax returns would be the most intrusive and burdensome way to discover information about other business interests of Wittstrom. Wittstrom has already admitted several additional business interests (beyond Vyasil) in his deposition, and Plaintiffs could have (and perhaps did) served subpoenas to uncover other business interests (for example, to the California Secretary of State). What's more, Wittstrom's other business interests are not directly relevant to Plaintiffs claims; they are only relevant to making a side point about Wittstrom's knowledge of LLC-member duties. To be sure, that might very well be a relevant issue, but on balance with the burden, other avenues, and probative force, this basis is rejected. The Court notes too that, after converting the in camera materials into OCR-searchable text, the Court did a word search (including partial words) for "Wittstrom Enterprise," and found nothing (this arises from Plaintiffs contention about "Karl F. Wittstrom Enterprises"). The second proffered basis is also rejected, because Wittstrom offers (in his response) to stipulate that Vyasil is not reported on his personal income tax returns. Whether that is admissible under Rule 608(b) or some other theory will be decided at the pretrial-conference stage. Plaintiffs also sought Vyasil's corporate tax returns. Tannehill did not have possession of the returns at the time of the response to the document request, but then remembered the name of the accountant and obtained copies for 2009 and 2010. If he has not done so already, Tannehill must disclose the returns by 06/29/2016.As previously stated, R. 215, the defense motion for extension of time to complete discovery #188 is denied in part; discovery was extended to 06/27/2016, R. 215.Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
June 25, 2016 Filing 222 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc.in Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to amend/correct answer to complaint #172 and affirmative defenses #218 (London, Justin)
June 22, 2016 Filing 221 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:The tracking status hearing of 06/23/2016 is vacated. A decision the motion to compel tax returns #184 will be issued in due course.Emailed notice (slb, )
June 22, 2016 Filing 220 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion to amend affirmative defenses #218 , Plaintiff shall respond by 06/27/2016. The motion hearing is reset to coincide with the 07/07/2016 status hearing at 11:30 a.m. As a reminder, there is no appearance for tomorrow's status hearing, which was set to track the tax-return issue. Emailed notice (slb, )
June 15, 2016 Filing 219 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion to amend/correct, motion for relief #218 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 6/23/2016 at 10:15 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
June 15, 2016 Filing 218 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to amend/correct answer to complaint #172 and affirmative defenses (Bullard, Paul)
June 10, 2016 Filing 217 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The defense motion to clarify #216 is granted insofar as Wittstrom's deposition may be taken on or before 07/01/2016. The remainder of fact discovery closes on 06/27/2016.Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
June 9, 2016 Filing 216 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to clarify June 6, 2016 and June 8, 2016 orders (Bullard, Paul)
June 8, 2016 Filing 215 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The unopposed defense motion #214 to take Plaintiff's deposition on 06/14/2016 is granted. The defense extension motion #188 is denied in large part: as explained in R. 181, both sides did not come close to advancing discovery in a timely way, and the prior extension was an act of mercy rather than based on good cause. And there is no explanation in the defense motion why the subpoena to inspect Plaintiffs' servers was issued on 04/26/2016 instead of much earlier. Subpoena compliance is expected (because it would be completed by the 06/13/2016 deadline), but follow-up discovery might very well not finish on time, which is what happens when subpoenas are issued too late in discovery. Because the Wittstrom deposition will occur sometime between 06/20/2016 and 06/27/2016, fact discovery is extended to 06/27/2016, but that is all. The status hearing of 06/20/2016 is reset to 07/07/2016 at 11:30 a.m. The other status hearing of 06/23/2016 remains in place, but just to track the tax-return issue.Emailed notice (slb, )
June 8, 2016 Filing 214 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstromto set deposition date of Justin London after current close of discovery (Bullard, Paul)
June 8, 2016 Filing 213 SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendant Ryan Tannehill (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10)(Bullard, Paul)
June 8, 2016 Filing 212 SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendant Karl Wittstrom (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5)(Bullard, Paul)
June 8, 2016 Filing 211 AMENDED response in opposition to motion #194 (Bullard, Paul)
June 7, 2016 Filing 210 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Motion hearing held on Plaintiff's motion for protective order concerning Charles Daugherty attendance at deposition #198 . For the reasons discussed during the hearing, the motion #198 is granted. Charles Daugherty shall not attend Plaintiff's deposition. This moots out Plaintiff's request for alternative relief, which was to compel Mr. Daugherty to sit for a continued deposition; no continued deposition of him shall take place. On Plaintiff's motion to compel tax returns #184 , Defendants stated their intention to file documents for in camera review (as suggested by the Court); they may do so ex parte and under seal by 06/10/2016. The tracking status hearing on the motion set for 06/08/2016 is reset to 06/23/2016 at 10:15 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
June 6, 2016 Filing 209 NOTICE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom re reply #208 (Bullard, Paul)
June 6, 2016 Filing 208 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to response in opposition to motion #196 (Bullard, Paul)
June 6, 2016 Filing 207 NOTICE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom re response in opposition to motion #206 (Bullard, Paul)
June 6, 2016 Filing 206 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstromin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for protective order pursuant to Rule 26(c)(5) #198 (Bullard, Paul)
June 6, 2016 Filing 205 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On the Court's own initiative, Plaintiffs' motion for protective order and to set deposition #198 is reset to 8:45 a.m. on the same date, 06/07/2016.Emailed notice (slb, )
June 6, 2016 Filing 204 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion to set deposition of Wittstrom #200 is granted in part: the parties shall take Wittstrom's deposition sometime during the weeks of 06/20/2016 or 06/27/2016, and the deposition shall not be continued absent the most extraordinary of circumstances arising after today. Emailed notice (slb, )
June 4, 2016 Filing 203 AMENDED memorandum in support of motion #33 Exhibit 1 - Corrected May 14, 2013 Declaration of Karl Wittstrom (Bullard, Paul)
June 1, 2016 Filing 202 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief #200 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 6/7/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
June 1, 2016 Filing 201 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of (London, Justin)
June 1, 2016 Filing 200 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc.to set Defendant's Wittstrom deposition date (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
June 1, 2016 Filing 199 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for protective order #198 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 6/7/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
May 31, 2016 Filing 198 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for protective order pursuant to Rule 26(c)(5) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
May 31, 2016 Filing 197 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to response in opposition to motion #194 to compel (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
May 31, 2016 Filing 196 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc.in Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to complete discovery #188 (London, Justin)
May 30, 2016 Filing 195 NOTICE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom re response in opposition to motion #194 (Bullard, Paul)
May 30, 2016 Filing 194 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstromin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to compel #184 (Bullard, Paul)
May 27, 2016 Filing 193 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's discovery extension motion #188 , Plaintiff shall respond by 06/02/2016. Defendants may reply by 06/06/2016. Discovery must continue to advance during that time.Emailed notice (slb, )
May 27, 2016 Filing 192 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion to amend affirmative defenses #186 is denied without prejudice. There is no statement of conferral with Plaintiffs, as required by the Court's Case Management Procedures.Emailed notice (slb, )
May 24, 2016 Filing 191 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Plaintiffs' motion to compel Vyasil and Wittstrom tax returns #184 , the defense shall respond by 05/31/2016. The defense should consider filing, along with the response, an ex parte and under seal submission with some or all of the sought-after documents, and then argue why nothing more is needed (file it electronically under seal like any other ex parte, under seal filing on CM/ECF). Plaintiffs may reply by 06/06/2016, including arguing why an ex parte, in camera inspection is insufficient. The parties shall not hold-up any other discovery, including depositions, over this dispute. To track the motion, a status hearing is set for 06/08/2016 at 9 a.m. The other status hearing (set for 06/09/2016) is reset to 6/20/2016 at 9:30 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
May 24, 2016 Filing 190 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion for rule to show cause against Stephanie Pequeno #182 is denied. A motion to compel a non-party under a subpoena must be made in the District of compliance, which is not (in view of Pequeno's residence) the Northern District of Illinois. Plaintiffs must file the motion in the proper District. Having said that, under Rule 45(f), this Court would allow Pequeno and any counsel for her to appear by phone in this District, and allow any other reasonable conveniences, if the other District wishes to transfer any motion to compel to this Court to decide. Emailed notice (slb, )
May 24, 2016 Filing 189 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion for extension of time to complete discovery #188 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/31/2016 at 08:30 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
May 24, 2016 Filing 188 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to complete discovery (Bullard, Paul)
May 24, 2016 Filing 187 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion to amend/correct #186 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/31/2016 at 08:30 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
May 24, 2016 Filing 186 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to amend/correct affirmative defenses (Bullard, Paul)
May 20, 2016 Filing 185 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to compel #184 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/25/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
May 20, 2016 Filing 184 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to compel (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
May 18, 2016 Filing 183 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for rule to show cause #182 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/25/2016 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
May 18, 2016 Filing 182 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for rule to show cause (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
April 7, 2016 Filing 181 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status and motion hearing held on Defendant's motion to quash subpoena #178 . Plaintiff's attorney appeared by telephone. As discussed in court, the motion #178 is denied without prejudice, and the enforcement of the subpoena itself is suspended until the completion of the deposition of Defendant Wittstrom. After the deposition, if Plaintiffs believe that the subpoena (or some limited version of it) should be enforced, then Plaintiffs shall file a motion to do so, and to shift fees and costs if appropriate. Counsel for both parties reported on the status of discovery. As explained during the hearing, neither side has advanced discovery with enough promptness, including failing to produce documents until the other side did so; agreeing to extensions that would necessarily impact the 04/25/2016 discovery deadline; failing to sufficiently confer and thus to be in a position to move to compel well in advance of the deadline; and failing to seek an extension on the service of non-party subpoenas. Indeed, the parties also violated the Case Management Procedures by seeking a discovery extension verbally instead of in a detailed written motion. Out of mercy for both sides, and not really on good cause, the fact discovery deadline of 04/25/2016 is extended to 06/13/2016. Status hearing set for 06/09/2016 at 10:15 a.m., at which time the parties shall be prepared to report on the next step of the litigation (expert discovery; dispositive motion (one round only); settlement conference; or trial schedule). Emailed notice (slb, )
April 4, 2016 Filing 180 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Earlier this morning, Defendant's counsel informed chambers that he was unable to appear due to a back injury. The status hearing will proceed on 04/07/2016 at 10:30 a.m. CT. The Court will hear Defendant's Motion to Quash Subpoena #178 on 04/07/2016 at 10:30 a.m. CT. Plaintiff's counsel Justin London is granted leave to appear by phone and the court will contact him at the appropriate time on 04/07/2016 at the phone number he provided. Mailed notice (ep, )
March 31, 2016 Filing 179 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion to quash #178 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/7/2016 at 09:30 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
March 31, 2016 Filing 178 MOTION by Defendant Karl Wittstrom to quash subpoena (Bullard, Paul)
March 15, 2016 Filing 177 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: No motion to compel compliance with the Affinity subpoena was filed, R. 176, so the status hearing of 03/17/2016 is reset to 04/04/2016 at 9:30 a.m., to confirm the scheduling of depositions to finish fact discovery by 04/25/2016. Emailed notice (slb, )
February 17, 2016 Filing 176 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held and motion hearing held on Plaintiff's motion to quash subpoena #174 . Counsel reported on the status of discovery. The parties have exchanged written discovery requests by the prior deadline; the responses are due 02/18/2016, though both sides might be conferring with the other on short extensions. Both parties issued non-party subpoenas. On Plaintiff's motion to quash #174 , for the reasons stated during the hearing, Plaintiff's motion #174 to quash is denied without prejudice. But the Court suspends compliance by the subpoena respondent, Affinity, and Defendant shall so notify Affinity. As discussed during the hearing, if Defendant determined that the documents are truly discoverable and needed, then Defendant may file a motion, by 02/29/2016, to authorize compliance with the subpoena. If a motion is filed, then Plaintiff's response is due 03/09/2016. Defense reply due 03/16/2016. Status hearing set for 03/17/2016 at 10:00 a.m.Emailed notice (slb, )
February 15, 2016 Filing 175 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to quash #174 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 2/17/2016 at 10:00 AM. (London, Justin)
February 15, 2016 Filing 174 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to quash subpoena (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
December 17, 2015 Filing 173 NOTICE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom re answer to complaint #172 (Bullard, Paul)
December 17, 2015 Filing 172 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom(Bullard, Paul)
December 10, 2015 Filing 171 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures due 12/30/2015. The first-round of written discovery requests to be issued no later than 01/18/2016. Fact discovery shall close by 04/25/2016. Any other Rule 26(a)(2) expert disclosures (whether retained or not) are due 30 days after the close of fact discovery, and the 30-day deadline is adjusted automatically if the close of fact discovery is adjusted. No summary judgment motions may be filed before the close of discovery without leave of Court. The parties shall serve subpoenas on non-party recipients by 02/29/2016. Status hearing set for 02/17/2016 at 10:00 a.m.Emailed notice (slb, )
December 9, 2015 Filing 170 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The unopposed extension motion #168 of Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill to answer the Third Amended Complaint is granted to 12/17/2015. The 12/10/2015 status hearing remains in place.Emailed notice (slb, )
December 8, 2015 Filing 169 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer #168 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/10/2015 at 10:15 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
December 8, 2015 Filing 168 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to file answer (Bullard, Paul)
November 17, 2015 Filing 167 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. For the reasons stated in the Opinion, the Court finds that specific personal jurisdiction applies to Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill. Those Defendants shall answer the Third Amended Complaint by 12/08/2015. The status hearing of 12/03/2015 is reset to 12/10/2015 at 10:15 a.m. The parties shall confer on a discovery schedule, restart settlement negotiations, and be ready to state whether another settlement-conference referral would be appropriate. Emailed notice(slb, )
November 10, 2015 Filing 166 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: For clarity's sake, the video recordings referred to in R. 165 should be brought to chambers by the close of business on 11/12/2015, and the defense should note that the Courthouse is closed for the federal holiday on 11/11/2015.Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
November 10, 2015 Filing 165 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Court is reviewing the motion on personal jurisdiction. In connection with that review, the defense shall supply the Court with a DVD or thumb drive containing the video recordings of Tannehill's and Wittstrom's depositions. Please bring the recordings to Judge Chang's chambers, Room 2178.Emailed notice (Chang, Edmond)
October 27, 2015 Filing 164 REPLY by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to Response #161 , reply #163 Amended (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Wittstrom Dep.)(London, Justin)
October 26, 2015 Filing 163 REPLY by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to Response #161 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(London, Justin)
October 13, 2015 Filing 162 NOTICE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom re Response #161 (Bullard, Paul)
October 13, 2015 Filing 161 RESPONSE by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Support of Personal Jurisdiction (Bullard, Paul)
September 21, 2015 Filing 160 MEMORANDUM by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. in support of personal jurisdiction (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit Tannehill Dep., #7 Exhibit Wittstrom Dep.)(London, Justin)
September 15, 2015 Filing 159 THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 3.1, #5 Exhibit 4, #6 Exhibit 5, #7 Exhibit 6, #8 Exhibit 7, #9 Exhibit 7.1, #10 Exhibit 8, #11 Exhibit 9, #12 Exhibit 9, #13 Exhibit 10, #14 Exhibit 11, #15 Exhibit 12, #16 Exhibit 13, #17 Exhibit 13.1, #18 Exhibit 14, #19 Exhibit 15, #20 Exhibit 15.1, #21 Exhibit 16, #22 Exhibit 17, #23 Exhibit 18, #24 19)(London, Justin) .
September 14, 2015 Filing 158 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendant Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion to reset briefing schedule #156 is granted in part and denied in part. The non-objection to the filing of the Third Amended Complaint is accepted, so Plaintiffs' motion to amend #145 is granted. Plaintiffs shall file the Third Amended Complaint on the docket as a separate entry. But briefing on the personal-jurisdiction issue will proceed as follows, in order to move this case, now almost 3 years old, to the point of resolving the personal-jurisdiction inquiry one way or the other. Plaintiffs shall file a brief in support of a finding of personal jurisdiction, to replace R. 153. If Plaintiffs do not believe that the amendment of the complaint affects the inquiry, then Plaintiffs can simply re-file R. 153. But Plaintiffs may of course modify the brief to take into account the amendment. The opening brief in support of personal jurisdiction is due by 09/21/2015; the brief may consume 20 pages. Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's response brief is due by 10/13/2015; it too may occupy 20 pages. Plaintiffs' reply is due by 10/27/2015. The status hearing of 10/22/2015 is reset to 12/03/2015. If the defense concedes that an evidentiary hearing is required, then that concession shall be so stated in their response brief. (The defense suggests that they want to know whether there will be an evidentiary hearing before filing the response, but the Court will not first decide whether an evidentiary hearing is needed until the defense files the response.) Emailed notice (slb, )
September 10, 2015 Filing 157 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion to amend/correct #156 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/15/2015 at 08:30 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
September 10, 2015 Filing 156 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to amend/correct briefing schedules (Bullard, Paul)
September 9, 2015 Filing 155 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Defendants' counsel did not appear, though he showed up later, well after the court call. Defendant's response due 09/16/2015 to Plaintiffs' motion to file Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs' reply due 09/23/2015. Status hearing set for 10/22/2015 at 9:45 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
September 1, 2015 Filing 154 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' motion for extra pages #148 is granted, up to 5 additional pages. Defendants' motion to withdraw appearances #150 of Greg Shinall and Spenser Q. Friel) is granted.Emailed notice (slb, )
August 31, 2015 Filing 153 MEMORANDUM memorandum, #152 by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. Amended (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit Wittstrom Deposition, #7 Exhibit Tannehill Deposition)(London, Justin)
August 31, 2015 Filing 152 MEMORANDUM by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit Wittstrom Dep., #7 Exhibit Tannehill Dep.)(London, Justin)
August 28, 2015 Filing 151 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion to withdraw #150 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/9/2015 at 09:00 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
August 28, 2015 Filing 150 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to withdraw appearances of Greg Shinall and Spenser Q. Friel (Bullard, Paul)
August 27, 2015 Filing 149 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for leave to file excess pages #148 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/2/2015 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
August 27, 2015 Filing 148 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for leave to file excess pages (London, Justin)
August 21, 2015 Filing 147 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to file instanter, motion to amend/correct,,,, #145 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/9/2015 at 09:00 AM. (London, Justin)
August 21, 2015 Filing 146 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to file instanter, motion to amend/correct,,,, #145 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/9/2016 at 09:00 AM. (London, Justin)
August 21, 2015 Filing 145 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to file instanter , MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to amend/correct (Attachments: #1 Supplement, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit, #8 Exhibit, #9 Exhibit, #10 Exhibit, #11 Exhibit, #12 Exhibit, #13 Exhibit, #14 Exhibit, #15 Exhibit, #16 Exhibit, #17 Exhibit, #18 Exhibit, #19 Exhibit, #20 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
August 9, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 144 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/9/2015: For the reasons stated in the Order, Plaintiffs' motion to strike and for sanctions #117 and the additional motion for sanctions #120 are denied, though without prejudice to raising the issue during the actual briefing and in-court hearing (if needed) on personal jurisdiction. As explained in the Order, Plaintiffs' opening brief on personal jurisdiction is due by 09/02/2015. Defendant Ryan and Wittstrom's response is due by 09/23/2015. Plaintiffs' reply is due by 10/07/2015. Status hearing of 08/21/2015 is reset for 9/9/2015 at 09:00 AM.Emailed notice(Chang, Edmond)
July 15, 2015 Filing 143 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Court still has the pending motions under advisement. Status hearing of 07/16/2015 is reset to 08/21/2015 at 9:15 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
July 1, 2015 Filing 142 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The status hearing of 07/02/2015 is reset to 07/16/2015 at 11:30 a.m., because the pending motions are still under advisement. Emailed notice (slb, )
July 1, 2015 Filing 141 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: terminated.Defendants' motion to withdraw the appearance of Matthew H. Rice is granted. Emailed notice (slb, )
June 29, 2015 Filing 140 NOTICE of Motion by Greg Shinall for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney #139 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 7/2/2015 at 09:30 AM. (Shinall, Greg)
June 29, 2015 Filing 139 MOTION by Attorney Matthew H. Rice to withdraw as attorney for Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom. No party information provided (Shinall, Greg)
June 29, 2015 Filing 138 DECLARATION of Paul Paolini (London, Justin)
June 23, 2015 Filing 137 DECLARATION of Toby Yeidid (London, Justin)
June 19, 2015 Filing 136 DECLARATION of Deborah Oxley (London, Justin)
June 3, 2015 Filing 135 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiff's motion to amend complaint #133 , which would be the third amended complaint, is denied, though without prejudice. The motion is bare bones, with no actual analysis of the propriety of filing another amended complaint, and no actual proposed amended complaint so that a reasonable evaluation can be made (sometimes a Rule 15(a)(2) motion is easy enough to evaluate without an actual proposed amended complaint, but that is not the situation here). Additionally, it would make sense first to decide the pending sanctions motions [117, 120]. Those motions are now fully briefed. The Court takes them under advisement. The status hearing of 06/04/2015 is reset to 07/02/2015 at 9:30 AM.Telephoned and Emailed notice (slb, )
May 29, 2015 Filing 134 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to amend/correct #133 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 6/4/2015 at 10:00 AM. (London, Justin)
May 29, 2015 Filing 133 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to amend/correct complaint (London, Justin)
May 29, 2015 Filing 132 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to response in opposition to motion #128 (London, Justin)
May 29, 2015 Filing 131 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to response in opposition to motion, #130 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
May 22, 2015 Filing 130 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstromin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to strike Wittstrom's corrected declarationMOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 and 37 #117 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7)(Shinall, Greg)
May 22, 2015 Filing 129 NOTICE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom re response in opposition to motion #128 (Bullard, Paul)
May 22, 2015 Filing 128 RESPONSE by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstromin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for sanctions for spoilation of evidence #120 (Bullard, Paul)
May 19, 2015 Filing 127 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's extension motion #124 is granted, over Plaintiffs' objection, in view of the volume of material filed in support of the motion. The response is due by 05/22/2015. Plaintiffs' reply due by 05/29/2015. Status hearing of 05/27/2015 is reset to 06/04/2015 at 10:00 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
May 15, 2015 Filing 126 NOTICE of Motion by Greg Shinall for presentment of extension of time #124 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/20/2015 at 08:30 AM. (Shinall, Greg)
May 14, 2015 Filing 125 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time (Emergency Motion) #124 (London, Justin)
May 14, 2015 Filing 124 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time (Emergency Motion) (Shinall, Greg)
May 6, 2015 Filing 123 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The agreed motion to extend 115 is granted: the parties may take Plaintiff London's deposition on 05/19/2015, and discovery is extended to 05/20/2015 for that purpose. Docket entry 113 is terminated as moot. In the past two days, Plaintiffs have filed two motions, noticed for presented noticed for 05/14/2015. Defendants' responses to the motions are due by 05/15/2015. Any replies are due by 05/20/2015. The deadlines are intentionally tight in order to move this case to the point of finishing personal-jurisdiction discovery and setting the stage for a decision on that issue. The status hearing of 05/07/2015 is reset to 05/27/2015 at 11:30 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
May 6, 2015 Filing 122 SUPPLEMENT to motion for sanctions, #120 , motion to strike,,,,, motion for sanctions,,,, #117 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Wittstrom Dep Transcript)(London, Justin)
May 6, 2015 Filing 121 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for sanctions, #120 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/14/2015 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
May 6, 2015 Filing 120 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for sanctions for spoilation of evidence (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit F.2)(London, Justin)
May 5, 2015 Filing 119 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion to strike,,,,, motion for sanctions,,,, #117 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/14/2015 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
May 5, 2015 Filing 118 SUPPLEMENT to motion to strike,,,,, motion for sanctions,,,, #117 Tannehill Deposition (London, Justin)
May 5, 2015 Filing 117 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to strike Wittstrom's corrected declaration, MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 and 37 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit A.1, #3 Exhibit A.2, #4 Exhibit A.3, #5 Exhibit B, #6 Exhibit C, #7 Exhibit D, #8 Exhibit D.1 (PDF not legible), #9 Exhibit D.2, #10 Exhibit D.3, #11 Exhibit E, #12 Exhibit F, #13 Exhibit G, #14 Exhibit H, #15 Exhibit I, #16 Exhibit J, #17 Exhibit K, #18 Exhibit L, #19 Exhibit M, #20 Exhibit N, #21 Exhibit N.1, #22 Exhibit O, #23 Exhibit P, #24 Exhibit Q, #25 Exhibit Q.1, #26 Exhibit R, #27 Exhibit S.1, #28 Exhibit S.2, #29 Exhibit S.3, #30 Exhibit S.4, #31 Exhibit T, #32 Exhibit U, #33 Exhibit V, #34 Exhibit W, #35 Exhibit WW, #36 Exhibit X, #37 Exhibit Y, #38 Exhibit YY, #39 Exhibit Z, #40 Exhibit ZZ)(London, Justin) (Modified by Clerk's Office on 5/6/2015) (sxw).
April 27, 2015 Filing 116 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief #115 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/7/2015 at 10:00 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
April 27, 2015 Filing 115 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to schedule deposition of Plaintiff Justin London and for Extension of Time (Bullard, Paul)
April 23, 2015 Filing 114 NOTICE of Motion by Paul William Bullard for presentment of motion to compel #113 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/7/2015 at 10:00 AM. (Bullard, Paul)
April 23, 2015 Filing 113 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to compel (Bullard, Paul)
April 14, 2015 Filing 112 AMENDED memorandum in support of motion #33 Exhibit 1 - Corrected Declaration of Karl Wittstrom (Shinall, Greg)
April 13, 2015 Filing 111 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by Michael Allen Maciejewski (Maciejewski, Michael)
April 13, 2015 Filing 110 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by Paul William Bullard (Bullard, Paul)
April 10, 2015 Filing 109 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On review of the deposition-related motions [105, 107], there is no good reason why Plaintiffs did not initially notice the depositions in the preferred sequence. And in light of the fact that these depositions are for the limited purpose of the personal-jurisdiction inquiry, they shall be limited to the usual 7 hours. Accordingly, the defense motion to confirm dates #105 is granted and Plaintiff's motion to expand #107 is denied. Tannehills deposition shall take place on 04/15/2015 at 9:30 am and Wittstrom's on 04/16/2015 at 9:30 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
April 8, 2015 Filing 108 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief, #107 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/13/2015 at 09:00 AM. (London, Justin)
April 8, 2015 Filing 107 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc.leave for additional time for depositions and leave to continue depositions to next day if needed (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B)(London, Justin)
April 8, 2015 Filing 106 Notice of Motion to Confirm Deposition Dates NOTICE of Motion by Spenser Q Friel for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief #105 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/13/2015 at 09:00 AM. (Friel, Spenser)
April 8, 2015 Filing 105 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl WittstromTo Confirm Deposition Dates (Friel, Spenser)
March 24, 2015 Filing 104 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion on location and format of depositions is granted almost entirely as follows: the equities weigh in favor of the deposition occurring in the District of those Defendants' residence, because the very issue that remains is whether this Court may exercise personal jurisdiction over them. Defendants have not otherwise connected themselves to Illinois in any other material way. But the depositions' location may take place within the Central District of California, and is not restricted to the county of residence. The parties shall also split the cost of taking a video deposition, with the view that testimony of those Defendants might be presented by video deposition instead of a live-witness or video-conference evidentiary hearing. The depositions shall take place before 04/27/2015, as well as any other deposition or discovery needed on the jurisdictional issue. Status hearing of 03/25/2015 is reset to 05/07/2015 at 10:00 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
March 24, 2015 Filing 103 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:Defendants' motion to withdraw the appearance of Dina Rollman #100 is granted. Emailed notice (slb, )
March 2, 2015 Filing 102 REPLY by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to Response #99 , memorandum #97 Regarding the Location of Wittstrom and Tannehill's Depositions (Friel, Spenser)
February 27, 2015 Filing 101 NOTICE of Motion by Greg Shinall for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney #100 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 3/25/2015 at 08:30 AM. (Shinall, Greg)
February 27, 2015 Filing 100 MOTION by counsel for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to withdraw as attorney Dina G. Rollman (Shinall, Greg)
February 23, 2015 Filing 99 RESPONSE by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to memorandum #97 , Response #98 Amended (Formatting of Footnotes Fixed) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
February 23, 2015 Filing 98 RESPONSE by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to memorandum #97 location of deposition (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
February 13, 2015 Filing 97 MEMORANDUM by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom Regarding The Location Of Their Depositions (Rollman, Dina)
January 30, 2015 Filing 96 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Written discovery deadline on personal jurisdiction has expired. Plaintiffs' counsel reported that he would like to take the depositions of Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom, and would like those depositions to take place in Chicago. Defendants reported that they object to the depositions taking place in Chicago and will be filing a motion to address the location of depositions. Defendants' motion to require that the depositions take place in California due 02/13/2015. Defendants' motion will also address the Court's authority to compel live-witness testimony for a personal-jurisdiction evidentiary hearing. Plaintiffs' response due 02/23/2015. Reply due 03/02/2015. Status hearing set for 03/25/2015 at 8:30 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
December 12, 2014 Filing 95 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The defense extension motion #90 to respond to written discovery is granted to 12/22/2014, but (1) Plaintiffs shall forthwith (no later than close of business 12/12/2014), if they have not already, notify the defense of the operative written discovery requests, as discussed in the motion; and (2) the Court sets a deadline on personal-jurisdiction discovery of 01/23/2015. This threshold phase of the litigation must come to a conclusion promptly; any discovery disputes must be brought to the Court's attention far enough in advance of the deadline to resolve the dispute and finish on time. The status hearing of 12/22/2014 is reset to 01/30/2015 at 9:00 a.m., to discuss whether a live-witness hearing will be required on the personal-jurisdiction issue, and if not, what the briefing schedule should be. Emailed notice (slb, )
December 11, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 94 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/11/2014: For the reasons stated in the Order, Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration #54 of dismissal of the California-code claim is denied.Emailed notice(Chang, Edmond)
December 10, 2014 Filing 93 AMENDED NOTICE of Motion by Spenser Q Friel for presentment of extension of time #90 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/15/2014 at 08:30 AM. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Friel, Spenser) (Docket Text Modified by Clerk's office on 12/11/2014) (sxw).
December 10, 2014 Filing 92 CERTIFICATE of Service by Spenser Q Friel on behalf of Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom regarding MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to respond to all written discovery requests #90 , notice of motion #91 (Friel, Spenser)
December 10, 2014 Filing 91 NOTICE of Motion by Spenser Q Friel for presentment of extension of time #90 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/15/2014 at 09:00 AM. (Friel, Spenser)
December 10, 2014 Filing 90 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to respond to all written discovery requests (Friel, Spenser)
November 13, 2014 Filing 89 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. To resume personal-jurisdiction discovery, both sides shall respond to outstanding written discovery requests by 12/15/2014. The parties must issue supplemental written requests, if any, by 11/17/2014. Response to the supplemental written discovery (if any) is also due 12/15/2014. Leave of Court is given to the parties to serve subpoenas on non-parties by 11/17/2014. Status hearing set for 12/22/2014 at 9:00 a.m. Motion hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for default judgment as to Defendant Mehul Vyas #79 . No one appeared on behalf of Defendant Mehul Vyas #79 . Based on the supplement affidavit filed by the process server, service was properly effectuated under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(2). Because the answer is overdue, Plaintiff's motion for default judgment as to Mehul Vyas #79 is granted. Judgment in a sum-certain must await the remainder of the litigation. Emailed notice (slb, )
November 5, 2014 Filing 88 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Maria Valdez: Settlement conference held on 11/5/2014. Parties could not reach terms of settlement at this time. All matters relating to the referral of this action having been resolved, case is returned to the assigned judge. Mailed notice (lp, )
October 28, 2014 Filing 87 AFFIDAVIT of Farhan Maqbool Supplement (Attachments: #1 Declaration UAE Notarization in Arabic, #2 Declaration English Translation of Notarization)(London, Justin)
October 27, 2014 Filing 86 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' extension motion #83 to file supplement and affidavit, R. 81, is granted to 11/03/2014. Emailed notice (slb, )
October 24, 2014 Filing 85 AFFIDAVIT of Farhan Maqbool regarding notice of motion #84 , motion for extension of time to file #83 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
October 23, 2014 Filing 84 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for extension of time to file #83 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 10/28/2014 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
October 23, 2014 Filing 83 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for extension of time to file affidavit (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(London, Justin)
October 16, 2014 Filing 82 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The status hearing of 10/17/2014 is reset to 11/13/2014 at 9 a.m., to coincide with the default-motion hearing. Emailed notice (slb, )
October 10, 2014 Filing 81 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Plaintiffs' motion for default against Mehul Vyas #79 , Plaintiff shall supplement the motion with a sworn affidavit from the process server, Greves Group, stating (a) the Greves Group's background and experience in serving process in Dubai for United States litigation; (b) if accurate, that neither Dubai nor the United Arab Emirates is a signatory to an internationally agreed means of service of process encompassing the United States, or if it is a signatory, that the means of process is not specified, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(2); and (c) if accurate, that neither Dubai nor the United Arab Emirates has a law prohibiting personal delivery as the means of service of process, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(2)(C) ("unless prohibited by the foreign country's law). The supplement is due by 10/24/2014. The motion hearing is reset to 11/13/2014 at 09:00 AM.Emailed notice (slb, )
October 6, 2014 Filing 80 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for default judgment #79 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 10/14/2014 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
October 6, 2014 Filing 79 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for default judgment as to Mehul Vyas (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit)(London, Justin)
September 9, 2014 Filing 78 CERTIFICATE of Service by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. regarding amended complaint #23 , summons issued on Mehul Vyas (Attachments: #1 Supplement Picture at Time of Service)(London, Justin)
September 3, 2014 Filing 77 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Plaintiff reported on the status of service of process as to Defendant Mehus Vyal, who is believed to be in the United Arab Emirates. Plaintiff reported that he has hired a process server to serve Defendant Vyal. One last time without a written motion, the Court extends the time to serve Mehus Vyal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) to 10/17/2014. But if Mehus Vyal has not been served by 10/17/2014, Plaintiff shall file a motion by 10/14/2014 (and noticed for presentment for 10/17/2014), requesting additional time to serve Mehus Vyal and explaining what steps were taken to serve that Defendant, including attaching affidavits from the process server(s), why such steps constitute good cause for an extension, and how service in the attempted manner will effectuate service under Rule 4. Status hearing set for 10/17/2014 at 8:30 a.m. Emailed notice (slb, )
August 12, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 76 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Maria Valdez: Magistrate Judge Status and Motion Hearing held on 8/12/2014. Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill's Unopposed Motion for Leave to Appear Telephonically at Settlement Conference #74 is granted. Case is set to 11/5/2014 at 2:00 p.m. in courtroom 1041 for settlement conference. Judge Valdez requires full compliance with the Court's Standing Order on Settlement Conference found on Judge Valdez's website available at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov, or the parties can contact courtroom deputy, Lisa Provine, at (312)408-5135 for a copy. Failure to comply with the provisions of the Court's Standing Order may result in the unilateral cancellation of the settlement conference by the Court. Absent leave from the Court, cancellation will result if the Plaintiff fails to submit to chambers copies of the settlement letters four days prior to the settlement conference. Because of the volume of settlement conferences conducted by Judge Valdez, once a settlement conference date has been agreed upon, no continuance will be granted without a motion showing extreme hardship. Mailed notice (lp, )
August 7, 2014 Filing 75 NOTICE of Motion by Spenser Q Friel for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief #74 before Honorable Maria Valdez on 8/12/2014 at 10:00 AM. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Friel, Spenser)
August 7, 2014 Filing 74 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl WittstromLeave to Appear Telephonically at Settlement Conference (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order, #2 Certificate of Service)(Friel, Spenser)
August 5, 2014 Filing 73 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiff's attorney, Justin London, visited the courtroom deputy's office, with the agreement of defense counsel, to ask for a continuance of the 08/27/2014 status hearing due to an out-of-town conflict. The status hearing of 08/27/2014 is reset to 09/03/2014 at 9:30 AM.Mailed notice (slb, )
August 4, 2014 Filing 72 WITHDRAWING Matthew H. Rice as counsel for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom and substituting Spenser Q Friel as counsel of record (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Friel, Spenser)
August 4, 2014 Filing 71 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by Spenser Q Friel (Friel, Spenser)
August 4, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 70 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Maria Valdez: This case has been referred to Judge Valdez to conduct a settlement conference. The parties are ordered to appear for status on 8/12/2014 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1041 to set a settlement conference date. The Parties are further directed to consult with their respective clients before the status date to determine the dates of unavailability for a settlement conference that may be set within the next eight weeks. Because of the volume of settlement conferences conducted by Judge Valdez, once a settlement conference date has been agreed upon, no continuance will be granted without a motion showing extreme hardship. Mailed notice (lp, )
August 4, 2014 Filing 69 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' Rule 4(m) extension motion to serve Mehul Vyas is granted in part, to the next status hearing of 08/27/2014. The motion is granted only in part because it does not explain what service efforts (if any) were made in the preceding several months. The Court will consider extending the time again beyond 08/27/2014, but that will be addressed at the next status hearing. Mailed notice (slb, )
August 1, 2014 Filing 68 SUR-REPLY by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to sur-reply #67 (London, Justin)
August 1, 2014 Filing 67 SUR-REPLY by Defendant Ryan Tannehill to motion for reconsideration, motion for relief, #54 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Certificate of Service)(Rice, Matthew)
August 1, 2014 Filing 66 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendant Tannehill's #63 unopposed motion to file sur-reply is granted. Tannehill shall file the sur-reply as a separate docket entry. Mailed notice (slb, )
August 1, 2014 Filing 65 Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Maria Valdez for the purpose of holding a settlement conference.(slb, )Mailed notice.
August 1, 2014 Filing 64 NOTICE of Motion by Matthew H Rice for presentment of motion for leave to file, #63 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/6/2014 at 08:30 AM. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Rice, Matthew)
August 1, 2014 Filing 63 MOTION by Defendant Ryan Tannehill for leave to file Surreply in Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration (UNOPPOSED) (Attachments: #1 Surreply in Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration, #2 Exhibit A to Surreply, #3 Certificate of Service)(Rice, Matthew)
July 30, 2014 Filing 62 REPLY by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. to memorandum in opposition to motion #59 for reconsideration (Attachments: #1 Supplement Supplement)(London, Justin)
July 30, 2014 Filing 61 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of extension of time #60 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 8/5/2014 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
July 30, 2014 Filing 60 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for extension of time to serve Mehul Vyas (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B)(London, Justin)
July 22, 2014 Filing 59 MEMORANDUM by Ryan Tannehill in Opposition to motion for reconsideration, motion for relief, #54 (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Rice, Matthew)
July 16, 2014 Filing 58 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The parties called the courtroom deputy to jointly ask for a settlement referral, and to suspend discovery in the meantime. The Court grants the request, and as the Court stated at a prior status hearing, this case does seem ripe for serious settlement negotiations, with risks, expense, and delay facing both both sides. Discovery is suspended. However, if Plaintiffs envision proceeding against unserved Defendant Vyal, Plaintiffs must continue the service efforts and file a motion to extend the time for service, showing due diligence, by 08/05/2014. Status hearing of 08/05/2014 is reset to 08/27/2014 at 9:00 AM.Mailed notice (slb, )
July 10, 2014 SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Mehul Vyas (pg, )
July 1, 2014 Filing 57 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Counsel reported on the status of discovery on personal jurisdiction: the parties have served written discovery request on each other, and the parties will respond to each other's requests by 07/11/2014, in an effort to finish discovery on time (the current deadline is 07/31/2014). Plaintiff is trying to serve some non-party subpoenas. Defendants response due 07/22/2014 to Plaintiffs motion for reconsideration #54 concerning the California Corporate Code claim. Plaintiffs reply due 08/05/2014. Plaintiff reported on the status of service of process as to Defendant Mehus Vyal, who is believed to be in the United Arab Emirates, which Plaintiff says is not a Hague Convention signatory. In light of the lack of service, well beyond the 120-day period in Rule 4(m), if Defendant Vyal is not served by the next status hearing, or if Plaintiff has not filed an extension motion showing due diligence, then Vyal will be dismissed without prejudice. As explained during the hearing, if this case does move forward beyond the personal-jurisdiction dispute, and onto merits discovery, the Court is trying to avoid a late addition of a party to the case that will undermine the prompt completion of discovery. Status hearing set for 08/05/2014 at 9:00 a.m.Mailed notice (slb, )
June 30, 2014 Filing 56 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On the Court's own initiative, the status hearing and motion hearing #54 of 07/01/2014 is reset from 8:30 a.m. to 9 a.m. (slb, )
June 16, 2014 Filing 55 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for reconsideration, motion for relief, #54 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 7/1/2014 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
June 16, 2014 Filing 54 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for reconsideration regarding order on motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction,,, #52 (London, Justin)
May 27, 2014 Filing 53 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held on 05/27/2014 and continued to 07/01/2014 at 8:30 a.m. The Court and the parties discussed the discovery on the personal jurisdiction issue. Both sides are authorized to issue written discovery immediately, including non-party subpoenas. In light of the issue that is the subject of discovery, Plaintiffs undoubtedly will be issuing the bulk of discovery requests, Defendants are allowed to propound discovery as well. Discovery on this issue will close, for now, on 07/31/2014. Among other things, the next status hearing will include a discussion on whether to allow depositions on the limited issue. Plaintiffs also raised the issue whether to amend the complaint now that California Corporate Code Section 17054 includes, according to Plaintiff, any corporate filing and not just the certificate of amendment. As discussed during the hearing, it might make sense to focus on the jurisdiction issue rather than try repleading at this time. On the other hand, as the Court deliberated over this issue after the hearing, there might be statute of limitations issues with waiting (relation back might apply, but the Court is not predetermining that), so it is up to Plaintiffs to decide whether they want to file a motion to amend the complaint on this claim. Also, at the next status hearing, Plaintiffs must be prepared to discuss the status of service of process on Mehus Vyal. It appears the time for service has long past on him. Mailed notice (tlp, )
May 22, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. For the reasons stated in the Order, Tannehill's and Wittstrom's motion to dismiss #32 is granted in part and denied in part. As explained in the Order, discovery is needed on the personal jurisdiction issue for the remaining claims. Status hearing of 05/27/2014 remains in place. Mailed notice(slb, )
May 7, 2014 Filing 51 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The motion to dismiss #22 filed by Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill is still pending. Status hearing of 05/08/2014 is reset to 05/27/2014 at 09:30 AM.Mailed notice (slb, )
April 21, 2014 Filing 50 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The individual Defendants' motion to dismiss #22 remains pending. Status hearing of 04/22/2014 is reset to 05/08/2014 at 10:30 AM.Mailed notice (slb, )
March 26, 2014 Filing 49 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: At Plaintiff's counsel's request, and without objection from the defense, the status hearing of 04/11/2014 is reset to 04/22/2014 at 08:30 AM. Mailed notice (slb, )
March 25, 2014 Filing 48 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction #22 remains under advisement. Status hearing of 03/26/2014 is reset to 04/11/2014 at 10:30 a.m. Mailed notice (air, )
March 11, 2014 Filing 47 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: By agreement of the parties, the status hearing of 03/27/2014 is reset to 03/26/2014 at 9:30 AM.Mailed notice (slb, )
February 26, 2014 Filing 46 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction #22 is still pending. Status hearing of 02/28/2014 is reset to 03/27/2014 at 09:00 AM.Mailed notice (slb, )
December 25, 2013 Filing 45 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill's motion to dismiss #32 remains pending. Status hearing of 01/07/2014 is reset to 02/28/2014 at 8:30 a.m. (lcw, )
November 20, 2013 Filing 44 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Karl Wittstrom and Ryan Tannehill's motion to dismiss #32 is under advisement. Status hearing of 11/21/2013 is reset to 1/7/2014 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (slb, )
September 27, 2013 Filing 43 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang:Defendants Karl Wittstrom and Ryan Tannehill's motion to dismiss #32 is fully briefed. The status hearing of 10/02/2013 is reset to 11/21/2013 at 8:30 a.m. Mailed notice (slb, )
July 10, 2013 Filing 42 REPLY by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to response in opposition to motion, #37 , MOTION by Defendants Karl Wittstrom, Ryan Tannehill to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim #32 (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Rice, Matthew)
June 28, 2013 Filing 41 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's unopposed extension motion #39 to reply is granted to 07/10/2013. Status hearing of 08/28/13 is reset to 10/02/13 at 8:30 a.m. Mailed notice (slb, )
June 26, 2013 Filing 40 NOTICE of Motion by Matthew H Rice for presentment of motion for extension of time to file response/reply, motion for relief #39 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 7/1/2013 at 08:30 AM. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Rice, Matthew)
June 26, 2013 Filing 39 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to file response/reply as to motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction #32 UNOPPOSED (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Rice, Matthew)
June 10, 2013 Filing 38 NOTICE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. re response in opposition to motion, #37 (London, Justin)
June 10, 2013 Filing 37 RESPONSE by GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc.in Opposition to MOTION by Defendants Karl Wittstrom, Ryan Tannehill to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim #32 (Attachments: #1 Affidavit Affidavit, #2 Affidavit Affidavit, #3 Supplement Table of Contents)(London, Justin)
June 4, 2013 Filing 36 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Plaintiffs' extension and expansion motion #34 is granted as follows: the response may be filed on 06/10/13 and may consume 25 pages. Defendants' reply is due 07/01/13. Status hearing of 08/06/13 is reset to 08/28/13 at 8:30 a.m. Mailed notice (slb, )
May 31, 2013 Filing 35 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for leave to file excess pages #34 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 6/5/2013 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
May 31, 2013 Filing 34 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for leave to file excess pages (London, Justin)
May 15, 2013 Filing 33 MEMORANDUM by Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom in support of motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction #32 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Rice, Matthew)
May 15, 2013 Filing 32 MOTION by Defendants Karl Wittstrom, Ryan Tannehill to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim (Rice, Matthew)
May 14, 2013 Filing 31 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by Matthew H Rice (Rice, Matthew)
May 8, 2013 Filing 30 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill's unopposed extension motion #28 to file motion to dismiss is granted to 05/15/13. Plaintiffs shall respond on or before 06/05/13. Defendants may reply on or before 06/26/13. Status hearing of 07/23/13 is reset to 08/06/13 at 9:00 a.m. Mailed notice (slb, )
May 6, 2013 Filing 29 NOTICE of Motion by Dina Rollman for presentment of extension of time #28 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/9/2013 at 08:30 AM. (Rollman, Dina)
May 6, 2013 Filing 28 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to respond to second amended complaint (unopposed) (Rollman, Dina)
April 18, 2013 Filing 27 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill's agreed motion #25 to set briefing schedule is granted: the motion to dismiss is due on 05/10/13. Plaintiffs shall respond on or before 05/31/13. Defendants shall reply on or before 06/21/13. Status hearing of 05/01/13 is reset to 07/23/13 at 8:30 a.m. Mailed notice (slb, )
April 17, 2013 Filing 26 NOTICE of Motion by Dina Rollman for presentment of motion by filer to set a briefing schedule, extension of time #25 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 4/22/2013 at 08:30 AM. (Rollman, Dina)
April 17, 2013 Filing 25 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom to set a briefing schedule (unopposed), MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to respond to Second Amended Complaint (unopposed) (Rollman, Dina)
March 28, 2013 Filing 24 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 3, #2 Exhibit 5, #3 Exhibit 7, #4 Exhibit 7.1, #5 Exhibit 8, #6 Exhibit 8.1, #7 Exhibit 9, #8 Exhibit 10, #9 Exhibit 10.1, #10 Exhibit 13, #11 Exhibit 13.1)(London, Justin)
March 28, 2013 Filing 23 Second AMENDED complaint by Veoxo, Inc., Justin London, GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc. against All Defendants (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 4, #4 Exhibit 11, #5 Exhibit 12)(London, Justin)
February 21, 2013 Filing 22 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Motion hearing held on Defendants' motion for a date certain by which Plaintiffs must seek leave to file their second amended complaint #19 . For the reasons stated in open court, Defendants' motion #19 is granted: Plaintiffs must be ready to file the second amended complaint by 03/25/13. Plaintiffs shall submit a copy of the proposed second amended complaint to Defendants three business days before filing it (if the parties agree, then Plaintiffs may simply file the second amended complaint (without prejudice to Defendants' answering or responding with a Rule 12 motion); if the parties disagree, then Plaintiff shall file a motion for leave to file the second amended complaint). Defendants' answer to the second amended complaint is due 04/22/13. The status hearing of 04/30/13 is reset to 05/01/13 at 8:30 a.m.Mailed notice (slb, )
February 19, 2013 Filing 21 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On Defendant Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion to set deadline #19 for second amended complaint, if Plaintiff has not filed a written response before the 02/21/13 motion hearing, Plaintiff must be fully prepared to respond verbally at the hearing. Mailed notice (slb, )
February 15, 2013 Filing 20 NOTICE of Motion by Dina Rollman for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief #19 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 2/21/2013 at 08:30 AM. (Rollman, Dina)
February 15, 2013 Filing 19 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for a date certain by which Plaintiffs must seek leave to file their second amended complaint (Rollman, Dina)
January 25, 2013 Filing 18 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit, #8 Exhibit, #9 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
January 23, 2013 Filing 17 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Motion hearing held. Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom's motion for extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs' complaint #12 is granted, and as discussed in open court, expanded to 02/22/13. Defendants will almost surely be filing a motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs' response is due on 03/14/13. Any reply is due on 03/28/13. By the close of business today, Plaintiffs shall file under seal the contracts referred to in the complaint, and shall disclose them to Defendants Tannehill and Wittstrom immediately (for now, under the protection of the model protective order; the parties shall promptly present a protective order for entry). Status hearing set for 04/30/13 at 8:30 a.m. Plaintiffs' motion for default judgment as to Defendant Vyasil LLC #14 is granted, in light of the overdue answer and the proper service of summons. Thus, under Rule 55(a), default is entered. However, no prove-up date is set because the Court cannot enter a sum-certain amount in light of the continuing litigation of the related Defendants. See Dundee Cement v. Howard Pipe & Concrete Products, 722 F.2d 1319, 1324 (7th Cir. 1983).Mailed notice (slb, )
January 23, 2013 Filing 16 SUPPLEMENT to amended complaint #10 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit, #8 Exhibit, #9 Exhibit, #10 Exhibit, #11 Exhibit, #12 Exhibit, #13 Exhibit, #14 Exhibit, #15 Exhibit, #16 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
January 19, 2013 Filing 15 NOTICE of Motion by Justin J. London for presentment of motion for default judgment #14 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 1/23/2013 at 08:30 AM. (London, Justin)
January 19, 2013 Filing 14 MOTION by Plaintiffs GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc., Justin London, Veoxo, Inc. for default judgment as to Vyasil (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(London, Justin)
January 18, 2013 Filing 13 NOTICE of Motion by Dina Rollman for presentment of extension of time #12 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 1/23/2013 at 08:30 AM. (Rollman, Dina)
January 18, 2013 Filing 12 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to respond to plaintiffs' amended complaint (Rollman, Dina)
January 18, 2013 Filing 11 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing set for 02/06/13 at 9:30a.m. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the attached status report requirements at least 3 business days before the initial status hearing. Mailed notice (Attachments: #1 Status Report Requirements) (slb, )
January 14, 2013 Filing 10 AMENDED complaint by Veoxo, Inc., Justin London, GMAX, Inc., Linkepic, Inc. against All Defendants (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(London, Justin)
January 8, 2013 Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Plaintiff as to Vyasil, Served 11/29/2012, answer due 12/20/2012 (London, Justin) (Docket Text Modified by Clerk's Office) (mr, ).
December 27, 2012 Filing 8 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Upon review of the complaint, R. 1, the Court makes the following jurisdictional inquiry. According to the complaint, plaintiffs rely on "diversity jurisdiction and supplemental jurisdiction over the parties and claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 28 U.S.C. 1367(a)." R. 1 para. 11. The reference to 1331 is perhaps a typographical error, because that section is federal-question jurisdiction, whereas diversity jurisdiction is 1332. All counts in the complaint appear to be based on state law causes of action, so 28 U.S.C. 1331 cannot be a basis for the Court's jurisdiction. Plaintiffs' allegations as to diversity jurisdiction are also deficient. Plaintiff has failed to properly allege subject matter jurisdiction because the citizenship of partiesas distinct from residencyis what matters. Denlinger v. Brennan, 87 F.3d 214, 216 (7th Cir. 1996). The allegations about the individual domestic defendants, Karl Wittstrom and Ryan Tannehill, are deficient because they fail to allege citizenship, as opposed to residency, of the parties. (The Court assumes that Plaintiffs use "domicile," in describing Plaintiff Justin London, as a synonym for citizenship, but if that is incorrect, the filing described below must also address that issue.) Furthermore, the complaint does not allege the principal place of business of the corporate plaintiffs, Linkepic Inc., GMAX, Inc., and Veoxo, Inc. The citizenship of a corporation is both the state of incorporation, as well as the principal place of business of the corporation. 28 U.S.C. 1332(c)(1). Plaintiffs also allege that defendant Vyasil, LLC is a "California company currently doing business in Illinois and in the Republic of India. R. 1 para. 5. But an LLC's citizenship is not like a corporations; instead an LLC is a citizen of every state where its members are citizens. Wise v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, 450 F.3d 265, 267 (7th Cir. 2006). Lastly, plaintiffs fail to specifically allege that the amount in controversy exceeds the required amount of $75,000 for diversity jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. 1332. Accordingly, on or before 01/14/13, Plaintiffs should either file an amended complaint fixing these problems, or otherwise file a memorandum explaining why the current complaint sufficiently alleges jurisdiction. Mailed notice (vkd, )
December 21, 2012 Filing 7 MINUTE entry before Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Defendants Wittstrom and Tannehill's extension motion #5 to answer or respond (including filing a motion to dismiss) is granted to 01/18/13. Mailed notice (slb, )
December 21, 2012 Filing 6 NOTICE of Motion by Dina Rollman for presentment of motion for extension of time to file response/reply, motion for relief, #5 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 12/27/2012 at 08:30 AM. (Rollman, Dina)
December 21, 2012 Filing 5 MOTION by Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom for extension of time to file response/reply as to summons issued, complaint, #1 (Rollman, Dina)
December 21, 2012 Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by Dina Rollman for Greg Shinall (Rollman, Dina) (Docket Text Modified By Clerk's Office.)
December 21, 2012 Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Karl Wittstrom by Dina Rollman (Rollman, Dina)
December 19, 2012 Filing 2 AFFIDAVIT of John Glau regarding summons issued, complaint, #1 (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service )(London, Justin)
November 26, 2012 SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Hemang Vyas (tg, )
November 20, 2012 SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Ryan Tannehill, Mehul Vyas (2 Different Addresses), Vyasil, LLC, Karl Wittstrom (nsf, )
November 9, 2012 CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Maria Valdez. (nsf, )
November 9, 2012 Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Justin London; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 0752-7745537. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service, #2 Certificate of Service, #3 Certificate of Service, #4 Certificate of Service, #5 Certificate of Service, #6 Certificate of Service)(Jamison, Theodore)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Veoxo, Inc. et al v. Vyasil, LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Vyasil, LLC
Represented By: Suzanne Marie Alton de Eraso
Represented By: David Michael Friebus
Represented By: Michael Thomas Werner
Represented By: John Michael Touhy
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Mehul Vyas
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Ryan Tannehill
Represented By: Dina Rollman
Represented By: Suzanne Marie Alton de Eraso
Represented By: David Michael Friebus
Represented By: Michael Thomas Werner
Represented By: Spenser Q Friel
Represented By: Michael Allen Maciejewski
Represented By: Greg Shinall
Represented By: Paul William Bullard
Represented By: John Michael Touhy
Represented By: Matthew H Rice
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Karl Wittstrom
Represented By: Dina Rollman
Represented By: Suzanne Marie Alton de Eraso
Represented By: David Michael Friebus
Represented By: Michael Thomas Werner
Represented By: Spenser Q Friel
Represented By: Michael Allen Maciejewski
Represented By: Greg Shinall
Represented By: Paul William Bullard
Represented By: John Michael Touhy
Represented By: Matthew H Rice
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Hemang Vyas
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Ryan Tannehill an individual doing business as RMT Enterprises
Represented By: Dina Rollman
Represented By: Suzanne Marie Alton de Eraso
Represented By: David Michael Friebus
Represented By: Michael Thomas Werner
Represented By: Spenser Q Friel
Represented By: Michael Allen Maciejewski
Represented By: Greg Shinall
Represented By: Paul William Bullard
Represented By: John Michael Touhy
Represented By: Matthew H Rice
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Vyasil, LLC a California company doing business as eWittas
Represented By: Suzanne Marie Alton de Eraso
Represented By: David Michael Friebus
Represented By: Michael Thomas Werner
Represented By: John Michael Touhy
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: GMAX, Inc.
Represented By: Justin J. London
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Veoxo, Inc.
Represented By: Justin J. London
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Justin London
Represented By: Justin J. London
Represented By: Theodore Roosevelt Jamison, III
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Linkepic, Inc.
Represented By: Justin J. London
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Sperling & Slater, PC
Represented By: Greg Shinall
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?