Telephone USA Investments , Inc. v. Lumen Technologies, Inc.
| Telephone Investments USA, Inc. and Telephone USA Investments, Inc. |
| Lumen Technologies, Inc. and Centurytel, Inc. |
| 1:2022cv02260 |
| April 29, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Mary M Rowland |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 42
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. The court will hold briefing on this motion in abeyance pending ruling on the pending motion to compel arbitration or dismiss. The Court reminds counsel that if parties require assistance, the proper course is to file a motion, not email court staff. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 41
Local Rule 56.1 Material Facts STATEMENT by Telephone USA Investments, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3)(Muzzo, Christopher)
|
|
Filing 40
MOTION by Plaintiff Telephone USA Investments, Inc. for summary judgment (Muzzo, Christopher)
|
|
Filing 39
RESPONSE by Lumen Technologies, Inc.in Support of MOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. to compel arbitration andMOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. to dismiss the complaint #28 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Scheduling Order)(Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 38
RESPONSE by Plaintiff Telephone USA Investments, Inc. to motion to compel, motion to dismiss #28 (Muzzo, Christopher)
|
|
Filing 37
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: In light of the briefing set on the pending motion [28, 35], the court strikes the status set for 6/21/22. The court will rule by mail or reset for an oral ruling following full briefing. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 36
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: The court clarifies the status of the pleadings: On 6/1/22 Defendant filed a motion in response to the original complaint. #28 . The court set a briefing and expedited it somewhat because the court is aware the parties are currently involved in arbitration. Plaintiff responded with an Amended Complaint. #31 . At that point, Defendant has the option to Answer or file another motion. The next day, Defendant sought leave to supplement its previous motion to dismiss or compel arbitration. #32 The court allowed this filing. #34 . At this point, there is no need for an Answer. Defendant has responded to the Amended Complaint with a motion to dismiss or to compel arbitration that has been supplemented. [28, 35]. Briefing schedule has been set. The court strikes its order entered on 6/9/22. #33 . If the parties believe further clarification is necessary they should file a motion. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 35
SUPPLEMENT to motion to compel, motion to dismiss #28 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Arbitration Order)(Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 34
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Defendant's motion for leave to file supplement to its motions to compel arbitration and dismiss complaint #32 is granted. Defendant shall file supplement as a separate entry on the docket. Plaintiff is given leave to respond to Defendant's motion and supplement to its motion to dismiss or compel arbitration by 6/20/22 and reply is due 6/27/22. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 33
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Defendant shall answer or otherwise plead by 6/20/22. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 32
MOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. for leave to file Supplement to Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Dismiss the Complaint (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Supplement to Motion to Compel Arbitration and Dismiss the Complaint, #2 Exhibit A to Supplement to Motion to Compel Arbitration and Dismiss the Complaint)(Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 31
AMENDED complaint by Telephone USA Investments , Inc. against Lumen Technologies, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E)(Muzzo, Christopher)
|
|
Filing 30
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS held on 5/24/22 before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland. Video TRO hearing. Court Reporter Contact Information: Laura Renke, OfficialTranscript@gmail.com, 312.435.6053. IMPORTANT: The transcript may be viewed at the court's public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through the Court Reporter/Transcriber or PACER. For further information on the redaction process, see the Court's web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov under Quick Links select Policy Regarding the Availability of Transcripts of Court Proceedings. Redaction Request due 6/27/2022. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 7/5/2022. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 9/2/2022. (Renke, Laura)
|
|
Filing 29
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Plaintiff's response to motion to compel arbitration and to dismiss is due 6/10/22; reply due 6/17/22. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 28
MOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. to compel arbitration and, MOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. to dismiss the complaint (Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 27
ORDER : For the reasons explained in this order, Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order #5 ; #6 was denied on the record on May 24, 2022. Defendant's oral motion to dismiss is denied without prejudice. Defendant is ordered to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's complaint by June 10, 2022. In addition, this Court sets a telephonic status hearing for June 21, 2022, at 2:00 p.m. Counsel shall dial 866-434-5269; access code 3751971. Signed by the Honorable Mary M. Rowland on 5/25/2022. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 26
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Video motion hearing held on 5/24/2022. Oral argument heard. For the reasons stated on the record, the motions for temporary restraining order #5 #6 are denied. Order to follow. Mailed notice (cn).
|
|
Filing 25
REPLY by Telephone Investments USA, Inc. to MOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. for leave to file Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss #21 #22 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(Wright, Timothy)
|
|
Filing 24
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: On the court's own motion, hearing on Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order #5 #6 set for 5/24/22 at 1:00PM will be held by video conference. Counsel of record will receive an email with a link to join the video conference prior to the hearing. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing. The call-in number is 650-479-3207 and the call-in ID is 1801732451. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Violation of these prohibitions may result in sanctions, including removal of court issued media credentials, restricted entry to future hearings, denial of entry to future hearings, or any other sanctions deemed necessary by the Court. Mailed notice (cn).
|
|
Filing 23
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Defendant's motions for leave to file a reply in support of its motion for personal jurisdiction #22 and to seal certain documents #20 are granted. Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction #13 , is however, denied. When a court rules on a Rule 12(b)(2) motion based upon written submissions without holding an evidentiary hearing, the plaintiff need only establish a prima facie case of personal jurisdiction. Curry v. Revolution Labs., LLC, 949 F.3d 385, 39293 (7th Cir. 2020). Plaintiff has met its prima facie burden that this Court can exercise specific jurisdiction, which occurs when the defendant has "purposefully directed" its activities at residents of the forum state and where the plaintiff's claim is "linked to the [defendant's] activities or contacts with" Illinois. Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 47273 (1985); Kipp v. Ski Enterprise Corp. of Wis., Inc., 783 F.3d 695, 698 (7th Cir. 2015). Where, as here, the dispute centers around a contract, "a contract with a forum resident is not enough, standing alone, to establish jurisdiction in that forum." Lexington Ins. Co. v. Hotai Ins. Co., Ltd., 938 F.3d 874, 880 (7th Cir. 2019). Rather, Plaintiff must provide evidence that Defendant "reached out to [Illinois] during the formation and execution of these contracts." Id. Plaintiff has submitted the affidavit of Joseph Stroud, who serves as both Plaintiff's chairman and chairman of TelUSA Holdings. [21-1] 1. Stroud attests that Plaintiff has always been headquartered in Tinley Park, Illinois, and that that is where Plaintiff was doing business when Defendant solicited Plaintiff to create TelUSA Holdings. Id. 5. Stroud additionally states that the parties negotiated all the provisions of the Agreement at issue in Tinley Park, Illinois; in fact, Defendant's counsel and corporate officers traveled to Illinois to conduct such negotiations. Id. 6. All communications involving Plaintiff in these negotiations "were either to or from Tinley Park, Illinois." Id. Moreover, as Defendant concedes through the affidavit of its representative, Joan Randazzo, Defendant sent the right of refusal at the heart of the dispute to Plaintiff in Illinois. [13-1] 7. These facts indicating that Defendant "initiated the transaction and continued to reach into Illinois with respect to the transaction" are sufficient to meet Plaintiff's burden of providing a prima facie case for personal jurisdiction. Tata Int'l Metals, (Americas) Ltd. v. Kurt Orban Partners, LLC, 482 F. Supp. 3d 737, 746 (N.D. Ill. 2020); see Walden v. Fiore, 571 U.S. 277, 286 (2014) (holding that purposeful contacts, rather than random, fortuitous, or attenuated contacts, meet the test for specific jurisdiction). Mailed notice (cn).
|
|
Filing 22
MOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. for leave to file Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss #21 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Proposed Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss)(Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 21
MEMORANDUM by Telephone Investments USA, Inc. in Opposition to motion to dismiss/lack of jurisdiction #13 (Attachments: #1 Declaration)(Wright, Timothy)
|
|
Filing 20
MOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. to seal document sealed document #18 , sealed document #17 (Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 19
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Defendant is reminded that, under Local Rule 26.2, a party wishing to file any document under seal must move the Court for leave to file the document under seal. To the extent it wishes for certain documents to remain under seal, Defendant must file a proper motion by 5/23/22. Failure to do so say may result in this Court striking the under seal documents. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 18
SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. Exhibit 8 to Declaration of Philip Linse - 2018 Financial Package re #16 RESPONSE (Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 17
SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. Exhibit 7 to Declaration of Philip Linse - 2014 Financial Package re #16 RESPONSE (Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 16
RESPONSE by Lumen Technologies, Inc.in Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiff Telephone Investments USA, Inc. for temporary restraining order #6 , MOTION by Plaintiff Telephone Investments USA, Inc. for temporary restraining order #5 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Philip Linse, #2 Exhibit 1 to Declaration - Press Release, #3 Exhibit 2 to Declaration - Initial Application for Transfer of Control, #4 Exhibit 3 to Declaration - Plaintiff's Objection to Initial Application, #5 Exhibit 4 to Declaration - Notice to the FCC, #6 Exhibit 5 to Declaration - Demonstrative of Areas of Wisconsin served by TelUSA, #7 Exhibit 6 to Declaration - TelUSA Holdings LLC Agreement, #8 Exhibit 7 to Declaration - 2014 Financial Package - FILED UNDER SEAL, #9 Exhibit 8 to Declaration - 2018 Financial Package - FILED UNDER SEAL, #10 Exhibit 9 to Declaration - Administrative Services Agreement, #11 Exhibit 10 to Declaration - Jan. 10, 2022 Letter from Counsel for Telephone Investments to Lumen, #12 Exhibit 11 to Declaration - Feb. 22, 2022 Letter Agreement, #13 Exhibit 12 to Declaration - Arbitration Order, #14 Exhibit 13 to Declaration - April 8, 2022 Letter from Lumen, #15 Exhibit 14 to Declaration - April 15, 2022 Letter from Counsel for Telephone Investments, #16 Exhibit 15 to Declaration - April 28, 2022 Letter from Lumen)(Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 15
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: By 5/20/22, Plaintiff shall respond to Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction #13 . Plaintiff's response should indicate the bases of any opposition to Defendant's motion, or in the alternative, whether it agrees that this Court should transfer this case to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana under 28 U.S.C. 1631, which provides that, if the court finds jurisdiction lacking, "the court shall, if it is in the interest of justice, transfer such action or appeal to any other such court in which the action or appeal could have been brought at the time it was filed."Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 14
NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Lumen Technologies, Inc. (Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 13
MOTION by Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration of Joan E. Randazzo)(Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 12
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. by Phillip Samuel Sykes (Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 11
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Motion to appear pro hac vice by Phillip S. Sykes #10 is granted. Counsel is reminded to become familiar with this court's local rules (including the rules requiring local counsel and describing this court's trial bar). Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 10
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number AILNDC-19457401. (Sykes, Phillip)
|
|
Filing 9
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: On the court's own motion, telephonic motion hearing on Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order #5 #6 set for 5/24/22 is re-set to 1:00PM. (Please Note Time Change Only.) Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 8
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: By agreement of the parties, telephonic motion hearing on Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order #5 #6 is set for 5/24/22 at 10:00am. Parties shall call 866-434-5269; access code 3751971. Mailed notice. (dm, )
|
|
Filing 7
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Lumen Technologies, Inc. by Emery K. Harlan (Harlan, Emery)
|
|
Filing 6
MOTION by Plaintiff Telephone Investments USA, Inc. for temporary restraining order (Attachments: #1 Declaration)(Wright, Timothy)
|
|
Filing 5
MOTION by Plaintiff Telephone Investments USA, Inc. for temporary restraining order (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit)(Wright, Timothy)
|
|
CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (ak, )
|
|
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Mary M. Rowland. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Maria Valdez. Case assignment: Random assignment. (ak, )
|
|
Filing 4
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Telephone Investments USA, Inc. by Timothy W. Wright, III (Wright, Timothy)
|
|
Filing 3
CIVIL Cover Sheet (Muzzo, Christopher)
|
|
Filing 2
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Telephone Investments USA, Inc. by Christopher L Muzzo (Muzzo, Christopher)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT filed by Telephone Investments USA, Inc.; Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-19391594. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E)(Wright, Timothy)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
