Trujillo v. Apple Computer, Inc. et al

Filing 24

RESPONSE by Plaintiff Jose Trujillo to Defendant Apple, Inc.'s Affirmative Defenses (Drury, Larry)

Download PDF
Trujillo v. Apple Computer, Inc. et al Doc. 24 Case 1:07-cv-04946 Document 24 Filed 10/02/2007 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION JOSE TRUJILLO, individually and on behalf of all ) others similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) APPLE COMPUTER, INC., a California ) corporation and AT&T, Inc., a Texas ) corporation, ) ) Defendants. ) No. 07 CV 04946 Judge Kennelly Mag. Judge Ashman PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT APPLE INC.'S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Now comes Plaintiff, JOSE TRUJILLO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, by and through his attorneys, LARRY D. DRURY, LTD., and in response to Defendant APPLE, INC.'S Affirmative Defenses states as follows: FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Notify or Breach of Warranty) 1. As to those causes of action based upon a breach of warranty, plaintiff failed to notify Apple of any breach of warranty within a reasonable time after plaintiff knew or should have known of any purported breach. RESPONSE: Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Defendant, Apple's First Affirmative Defense. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2. The Complaint, and each of its purported causes of action, is barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of waiver. Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:07-cv-04946 Document 24 Filed 10/02/2007 Page 2 of 3 RESPONSE: Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Defendant, Apple's Second Affirmative Defense. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Estoppel) 3. The Complaint, and each of its purported causes of action, is barred, in whole or in part, by the equitable doctrine of estoppel. RESPONSE: Plaintiff denies the allegations contained Defendant, Apple's Third Affirmative Defense. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Equitable Relief - Remedies) 4. Plaintiff and the purported class are barred from asserting the claims for equitable relief alleged in the complaint because they have adequate remedies at law and/or the equitable relief is neither necessary nor proper under applicable law. RESPONSE: Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Defendant, Apple's Fourth Affirmative Defense. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Mitigate) 5. Plaintiff and the purported class have failed to mitigate their damages, if any. RESPONSE: Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Defendant, Apple's Fifth Affirmative Defense. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Lack of Article III Standing) 6. Apple alleges on information and belief that plaintiff and the members of the purported class lack standing under Article III of the Constitution of the United States. RESPONSE: Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Defendant, Apple's Sixth Affirmative Case 1:07-cv-04946 Document 24 Filed 10/02/2007 Page 3 of 3 Defense. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State a Claim - All Causes of Action) 7. The Complaint, and each and every cause of action therein, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause, or causes of action against Apple. RESPONSE: Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in Defendant, Apple's Seventh Affirmative Defense. By: Larry D. Drury Larry D. Drury, Ltd. 205 West Randolph Suite 1430 Chicago, Illinois 60606 312/346-7950 Atty. No. 0681024

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?