Netquote Inc. v. Byrd

Filing 83

Attachment 6
Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Counterclaim by Counter Claimant, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Document Second Amended Counterclaim# 2 Exhibit A to Proposed Counterclaim# 3 Exhibit B of Proposed Counterclaim# 4 Exhibit C (redacted) to Proposed Counterclaim# 5 Exhibit D to Proposed Counterclaim# 6 Affidavit LR 7.1 Certificate)(Isenberg, Ryan)

Download PDF
Netquote Inc. v. Byrd Doc. 83 Att. 6 Case 1:07-cv-00630-DME-MEH Document 83-7 Filed 09/21/2007 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 its Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Counterclaim. Plaintiff does not oppose MostChoice's motion for leave to amend. Plaintiff reserves the right to move to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12 and/or to move for summary judgment on the amended counterclaims. Dated this 21st day of September, 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 83-7 Filed 09/21/2007 Page 2 of 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 21st day of September, 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?