Two updates, in a day on this common law trademark infringement case. . . . Unusual, to say the least.
This very morning. . . is now is the second time the lawyers, for the scurrilous white country act just dumped a "corrected" filing onto the docket, without alerting the Judge's chambers to their errors. See below.
That's now a second time they've violated the USDC judge's local order.
I'll resist the urge to say that southern courts can be more. . . patrician than northern ones (though there are certainly are exceptions to that), and simply note that this is not the way to endear one's client, or one's law firm -- to any Music City federal judge:
. . .Finally, yet another “corrected” filing was made (Docket No. 87), without any apparent regard for the Court’s instructions in its most recent order about the procedures for withdrawing a filing. See Order, Docket No. 76 at n.1. The Court appreciates that errors can sometimes be unnoticed before a filing is made.
However, a closer review of draft filings should be paramount in this case, given that more than one filing with errors has now been made. Further, as previously directed, correction or amendment of a filing necessitates something more formal than simply a notice of a corrected filing, which can be too easily overlooked in the volume of filings on any given day and especially those that require some action by the Court. The Court is at a loss of how to be any more instructive in this regard except to state that continuation of the disfavored practice will become increasingly consequential. . . .
It is SO ORDERED. . . .
Hilarious -- the white country act seems to have made good, on the old maxim / saw that "every garbage can finds. . . its lid" -- in this firm.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment