jmke

It appears that HardOCP came away with a large victory. Without the transcriptions from the first depositions, we can only speculate based on subsequent motions on what transpired that day. It's quite obvious that the focus is purely on Tim Roberts and following the extensive money trail that has resulted. Section Six is of interest since it's the only one dealing with Kevin Bachus. What did Bachus say (or not say) during his deposition that piqued the interest of Kyle's lawyers?

We now have mention of a $50,000 loan that Roberts testified to in his deposition. What is the significance of this money? Further, will the production of emails, the old website and payroll be enough to prove Infinium can indeed be rightfully sued in Texas?

http://www.whereisphantom.com/module...rder=0&thold=0

__________________

jmke

Just in at the courthouse, an order regarding KB Network's Motion to Compel and Motion for Sanctions. Upon review of Plaintiff's Motion, the court finds that the motion should be granted in part and denied in part. Read on for the details...

Judge Kaplan has ordered Infinium Labs to prudce a series of documents by September 30th. These include:

1) "Documents reflecting the identity and location of potential investors, venture capitalists, investors, partners, shareholders to whom private placement memorandums were provided, or other stake or equity holders in Infinium Labs who are located in the state of Texas other than shareholders that acquired Infinium stock on the public market, and the transactions, proposed or consummated with same."

2) "Pleadings and final judgments from any Court of any Jurisdiction in which Timothy Roberts was or is a Defendant between the dates of August 1, 2001 and February 29, 2004; and; the 2003 Tax Return of Timothy Roberts when filed."

3) "All documents in their possession, custody, or control that evidence, reflect, relate to financial transactions (including any beneficial transaction) between Infinium and Roberts from August 2002 to the present, including but not limited to printouts of all bank, credit card, and other financial transactions currently maintained in electronic form."

4) "All emails sent or received by Infinium's Texas employees."

5) "All year-to-date payroll information and records for 2003-2004 for all of Infinium's Texas employees.

6) "All documents reviewed by Kevin Bachus in preparing the declaration submitted in support of Defendant's motion to dismiss that have not otherwise been produced."

7) "All loan documents between Infinium and Roberts, including but not limited to documents pertaining to the $50,000 loan Roberts testified about in his deposition."

8) "All archival data and all forum postings from Infinium's websites."

9) "A complete and unaltered copy of the 'Who's We' agreement."

10) "All Infinium board of directors minutes and resolutions, with the substance of the resolution redacted unless it pertains to Roberts. Defendants are also ordered to make unredacted copies of its board of directors minutes and resolutions available for inspection by Plaintiffs' counsel at the office of Defendants' counsel. Defendants shall make such documents available for inspection on or before September 30, 2004. If, after inspection, Plaintiffs believe that any redacted portions of these documents should be produced, they may seek appropriate relief from the court."

11) "Plaintiffs' may re-depose Infinium and Roberts, with questioning at the second depositions limited to documents and information not produced to Plaintiffs prior to the first depositions. The combined duration of the first and second depositions shall not exceed seven hours per witness. Additionally, at the option of defendants, the depositions may proceed by telephone... . Plantiffs shall pay the costs of the second depositions and each party shall bear its own attorneys' fees. The second depositions shall be completed by November 5, 2004."

Now, once you've digested all that you'll remember that the court also ruled against KB Networks in some parts. That is actually only one item which is: "Plantiffs' request for sanctions is denied."

Analysis

It appears that HardOCP came away with a large victory. Without the transcriptions from the first depositions, we can only speculate based on subsequent motions on what transpired that day. It's quite obvious that the focus is purely on Tim Roberts and following the extensive money trail that has resulted. Section Six is of interest since it's the only one dealing with Kevin Bachus. What did Bachus say (or not say) during his deposition that piqued the interest of Kyle's lawyers?

We now have mention of a $50,000 loan that Roberts testified to in his deposition. What is the significance of this money? Further, will the production of emails, the old website and payroll be enough to prove Infinium can indeed be rightfully sued in Texas

__________________