Can anyone decipher this?
It looks like the U.S. Jolida won a court victory, or am I mistaken?
"III. Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, the Shenda Parties' motion to remand and JoLida's motion for preliminary injunction will be denied, and Prylli's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction will be granted."
'A lie is halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on'. -Mark Twain
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Jolida Lawsuit - mbnx01 10:15:10 07/09/12 (8)
- It appears to be a collection of preliminary, procedural skirmishes - John Marks 13:53:00 07/09/12 (5)
- you must be a lawyer - mbnx01 15:19:14 07/09/12 (4)
- I think he said... - AbeCollins 16:00:56 07/09/12 (3)
- Paid, or not... - John Marks 16:24:12 07/09/12 (2)
- RE: Paid, or not... - Bill the K 20:20:29 07/09/12 (1)
- Clerked at Audio Asylum.....! - Frihed89 22:01:35 07/09/12 (0)
- "Gosh, such a juicy fact pattern; - Stephæn 11:52:54 07/09/12 (0)
- RE: Jolida Lawsuit - hesson11 11:16:00 07/09/12 (0)