Netquote Inc. v. Byrd

Filing 58

Attachment 1
Second MOTION to Amend/Correct/Modify 33 Answer to Amended Complaint, Counterclaim by Counter Claimant, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Certificate of Compliance with LR 7.1A# 2 Proposed Document Proposed Amended Counterclaim# 3 Exhibit A to Proposed Amended Counterclaim)(Isenberg, Ryan)

Download PDF
Netquote Inc. v. Byrd Doc. 58 Att. 1 Case 1:07-cv-00630-DME-MEH Document 58-2 Filed 07/30/2007 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 07-cv-00630-DME-MEH NETQUOTE INC, a Colorado corporation, Plaintiff, v. BRANDON BYRD, an internet user making use of the IP Addresses and, and MOSTCHOICE.COM, Inc., a Georgia corporation Defendants. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1A Comes Now, the undersigned counsel for Defendant, Inc. who certifies that he has conferred with counsel for the Plaintiff regarding the proposed Motion for Leave to Amend Mostchoice's Counterclaim, and that Netquote opposes said motion. Specifically, after the Court dismissed the previously filed motion for leave to amend for failing to comply with this rule, the undersigned inquired by e-mail whether Netquote would consent or oppose leave. Netquote, throught its counsel responded that it opposed the foregoing motion. Dated this 30th day of July, 2007. s/ Ryan Isenberg Ryan L. Isenberg, Esq. Isenberg & Hewitt, P.C. 7000 Peachtree Dunwoody Road Building 15, Suite 100 Atlanta, Georgia 30328 Telephone: 770-351-4400 Facsimile: 770-828-0100 (Fax) Email: Case 1:07-cv-00630-DME-MEH Document 58-2 Filed 07/30/2007 Page 2 of 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 30th day of July, 2007, I served the foregoing Certificate of Compliance with Local Rule 7.1A by electronic delivery, as an attachment to an email, to the following counsel of record: David W. Stark Daniel D. Williams FAEGRE & BENSON LLP 3200 Wells Fargo Center 1700 Lincoln Street Denver, Colorado 80203 s/ Ryan Isenberg

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?