Bid for Position, LLC v. AOL, LLC et al

Filing 99

MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims by Miva, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Proposed Order)(Finberg, Dana)

Download PDF
Bid for Position, LLC v. AOL, LLC et al Doc. 99 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA NORFOLK DIVISION ------------------------------------------------------------------X BID FOR POSITION, LLC, Plaintiff, -vAOL, LLC, GOOGLE, INC., MICROSOFT CORP. and MIVA, INC. Defendant. ------------------------------------------------------------------X MIVA, INC., Counterclaim Plaintiff, -vBID FOR POSITION, LLC, Counterclaim Defendant. ------------------------------------------------------------------X CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:07-CV-582 MIVA, INC.'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIMS TO BID FOR POSITION'S COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Miva, Inc. ("Miva"), by counsel, states as follows as its Motion for Leave to File an Amended Answer and Counterclaims and Memorandum in Support: 1. As a consequence of discovery conducted thus far in this case, Miva believes that it has grounds to amend its Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims to add allegations of inequitable conduct on the part of the plaintiff, Bid for Position, Inc. 2. Miva's proposed First Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims to Bid for Position's Complaint for Patent Infringement is attached as Exhibit 1. This pleading adds a new Fifth Affirmative Defense (paragraphs 26 through 40) and a new Third Counterclaim (paragraphs 12 through 13) directed to allegations of inequitable conduct. Dockets.Justia.com 3. Miva has provided a copy of the proposed First Amended Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims to Bid for Position's Complaint for Patent Infringement to counsel for Bid for Position. Bid for Position has informed Miva that it does not oppose this Motion. 4. Granting this Motion will not delay the progress of this case, and will not result in any change in the pretrial schedule adopted by the Court. 5. In the interests of justice, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 and the Local Rules of this Court, the Court should grant Miva's Motion. A Consent Order granting the relief sought is being filed contemporaneously with this Motion. Dated: May 20, 2008 Respectfully submitted, _____________/s/_________________ Dana J. Finberg (VSB No. 34977) dana.finberg@leclairryan.com LeClairRyan, A Professional Corporation Riverfront Plaza, East Tower 951 East Byrd Street, Suite 800 Richmond, Virginia 23219 Telephone: (804) 783-2003 Facsimile: (804) 783-2294 Paul D. Ackerman, pro hac vice Aasheesh Shravah, pro hac vice ackerman.paul@dorsey.com shravah.aasheesh@dorsey.com Dorsey & Whitney LLP 250 Park Avenue New York, New York 10177-1500 Telephone: (212) 415-9372 Facsimile: (212) 953-7201 Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiff Miva, Inc. 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 20th day of May, 2008, I will electronically file the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will then send a notification of such filing (NEF) to the parties listed below: Counsel for Plaintiff Bid for Position, LLC Craig T. Merritt R. Braxton Hill, IV Nichole Buck Vanderslice CHRISTIAN & BARTON, LLP 900 East Main Street, Suite 1200 Richmond, Virginia 23219-3095 Tel: (804) 697 ­ 4100 Fax: (804) 697 ­ 4112 cmerritt@cblaw.com bhill@cblaw.com nvanderslice@cblaw.com Gregory S. Dovel pro hac vice Christian Cho pro hac vice DOVEL & LUNDER, LLP 201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Tel: (310) 656 ­ 7066 Fax: (310) 656 ­ 7069 greg@dovellaw.com christen@dovellaw.com David Rosen pro hac vice MURPHY ROSEN & MEYLAN, LLP 100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1300 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Tel: (310) 899 ­ 3300 Fax: (310) 399 ­ 7201 drosen@mrmlawyers.com 3 Counsel for Defendants Google Inc. and AOL LLC Stephen E. Noona (VSB No. 25367) KAUFMAN & CANOLES, P.C. 150 West Main Street, Suite 2100 Norfolk, Virginia 23510 Telephone: (757) 624-3000 Facsimile: (757) 624-3169 senoona@kaufcan.com Charles K. Verhoeven, pro hac vice David A. Perlson, pro hac vice Emily c. O'Brien, pro hac vice Antonio R. Sistos, pro hac vice Katherine H. Bennett, pro hac vice QUINN EMANUEL URGUHART OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP 50 California street, 22nd Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 875-6600 Facsimile: (415) 875-6700 charlesverhoeven@quinnemanuel.com davidperlson@quinnemanuel.com emilyobrien@quinnemanuel.com antoniosistos@quinnemanuel.com katheinebennett@quinnemanuel.com Thomas D. Pease, pro hac vice QUINN EMANUEL URGUHART OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP 51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor New York, NY 10010 Telephone: (212) 849-7000 Facsimile: (212) 849-7100 thomaspease@quinnemanuel.com Counsel for Defendant AOL LLC John M. Williamson, pro hac vice FINNEGAN HENDERSON FARABOW GARRET & DUNNER LLP 901 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 408-4000 Facsimile: (202) 408-4400 john.williamson@finnegan.com 4 Robert L. Burns, II, pro hac vice FINNEGAL HENDERSON FARABOW GARRETT & DUNNER LLP Two Freedom Square 11955 Freedom Drive Reston, Virginia 20190 Telephone: (571) 203-2700 Facsimile: (202) 408-4400 robert.burns@finnegancom Counsel for Microsoft Corporation William D. Dolan, III (VSB No. 12455) Michael W. Robinson (VSB No. 26522) VENABLE LLP 8010 Towers Crescent Drive, Suite 300 Vienna, VA 22182 Telephone: (703) 760-1600 Facsimile: (703) 821­8949 wddolan@venable.com mwrobinson@venable.com Richard A. Cederoth pro hac vice Laura L. Kolb, pro hac vice SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 1 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60603 Telephone: (312) 853-7000 Facsimile: (312) 853-7036 rcederoth@sidley.com lkolb@sidley.com By:_____________/s/______________ Dana J. Finberg (VSB No. 34977) LeClairRyan, A Professional Corporation Riverfront Plaza, East Tower 951 East Byrd Street, Eighth Floor Richmond, Virginia 23219 Tel.: (804) 916-7109 Fax.: (804) 916-7219 Dana.finberg@leclairryan.com Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiff Miva, Inc. 5

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?