Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Phonedog v. Kravitz, 11-cv-03474-MEJ (N.D. Cal.; Apr. 30, 3012)

Phonedog v. Kravitz, 11-cv-03474-MEJ (N.D. Cal.; Apr. 30, 3012)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 439|Likes:
Kravitz seeks to file amended counterclaims against Phonedog.
Kravitz seeks to file amended counterclaims against Phonedog.

More info:

Published by: Venkat Balasubramani on May 09, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/09/2012

pdf

text

original

 
E
XHIBIT
A
Case3:11-cv-03474-MEJ Document46-1 Filed04/30/12 Page1 of 26
 
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER CASE NO. 3:11-cv-03474 (MEJ)
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728MARGARET A. KEANE (State Bar No. 255378)mkeane@dl.comDEWEY & LEBOEUF LLPPost Montgomery CenterOne Montgomery Street, Suite 3500San Francisco, CA 94104Telephone: (415) 951-1100Facsimile: (415) 951-1180Cary Kletter (State Bar No. 210230)Sally Trung Nguyen (State Bar No. 267275)ckletter@kletterlaw.comKLETTER LAW FIRM1900 S. Norfolk Street, Suite 350San Mateo, CA 94403Telephone: (415) 434-3400
 Attorneys for Defendant Noah Kravitz
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTNORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PHONEDOG, LLC, a Delaware corporation,Plaintiff,v.NOAH KRAVITZ, an individual,Defendant.))))))))))))))Case No. 3:11-cv-03474 (MEJ)
NOAH KRAVITZ’S FIRST AMENDEDCOUNTERCLAIMS AND ANSWER TOPLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDEDCOMPLAINT FORMISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADESECRETS, INTERFERENCE WITHPROSPECTIVE ECONOMICADVANTAGE AND CONVERSION
Case3:11-cv-03474-MEJ Document46-1 Filed04/30/12 Page2 of 26
 
FIRST AMENDED ANSWER
1
CASE NO. 3:11-cv-03474 (MEJ)
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
NOAH KRAVITZ’S FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIMS AND ANSWER TOPLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendant Noah Kravitz (“Kravitz”) answers the First Amended Complaint (the “AmendedComplaint”) filed on November 29, 2011 by plaintiff PhoneDog, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “PhoneDog”)as follows:
Jurisdiction
1. Kravitz lacks sufficient information to admit or deny the allegation that PhoneDog isa Delaware Corporation and, on that basis, denies the allegation. Kravitz admits, on information andbelief, that two similar sounding limited liability companies are registered with the State of Delaware: PhoneDog Communications LLC and PhoneDog Media LLC. Kravitz admits, oninformation and belief, that PhoneDog’s principal place of business is Mount Pleasant, SouthCarolina.2. Kravitz admits that he is a California resident and resides in Alameda County,California.3. Kravitz denies the allegations of paragraph 3. Kravitz specifically denies thatPhoneDog’s causes of action against him state claims for relief in excess of $75,000 and, therefore,Kravitz denies that this Court has original jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
Venue
4. Kravitz admits that if this court had original jurisdiction of this matter under 28U.S.C. § 1332(a) then venue in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California would be proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a) because Kravitz resides in this judicial districtand is subject to personal jurisdiction here.
THE PARTIES
5. Kravitz lacks sufficient information to admit or deny the allegation that PhoneDog isa corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and, on that basis,denies the allegation. Kravitz admits, on information and belief, that two similar sounding limitedliability companies are registered with the State of Delaware: PhoneDog Communications LLC and
Case3:11-cv-03474-MEJ Document46-1 Filed04/30/12 Page3 of 26

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->