Mr. Faraj --
Again, thank you for your consideration of my firm in this
matter. Further to my cursory review of the docket report and pleadings,
I have several questions. As background, please be advised that I have
fairly significant trademark, federal litigation, and Eastern District
experience. However, my years of experience have shown me the wisdom of
treading lightly where others have gone before. Moreover, I am frankly
astonished that a judge in the Eastern District has allowed a party to blow
through this many attorneys, particularly with deadlines set. This makes
it highly likely that the next Virginia counsel will be their last, and that
permission will not be granted for that counsel to withdraw. This makes
it doubly important to tread lightly, and to understand the situation as fully
as possible before committing.
I apologize in advance if this seems unduly blunt; however, I
believe circumstances justify some direct and expedited communication.
1.
Defendants have gone through default (albeit vacated) and two sets of Virginia
counsel. Why? Their various pleadings state that it is logistically
difficult to retain Virginia counsel, but my many years' experience retaining
and managing local counsel nationwide for a major automobile manufacturer's
national products liability defense team suggests that in fact it is not.
Why do Defendants continue to argue that this is a difficult endeavor?
2.
Your email says that their Michigan counsel does not represent them in this
matter. However, the Court's docket report states to the contrary.
Please explain.
3.
Defendants have known since April 21 that they must retain new Virginia
counsel. What has occasioned this most recent delay in doing so?
4.
Were any of the issues with prior counsel caused by Defendants' failure to pay
their attorneys?
5.
Are Defendants looking for Virginia counsel to take the lead counsel or local
counsel role?
These are threshold questions. Others will follow
depending upon the answers to these.
As you are no doubt aware, there is a fair amount at stake here
for Defendants. In addition to the alleged new damages, the settlement
agreement provides that the losing party pays the prevailing party's attorneys
fees in any enforcement litigation.
Please do not misconstrue my questions as impugning Defendants'
defenses or integrity. However, especially with this history, it is
important to be clear about the causes, and about expectations going forward.
We can discuss the above points by telephone if you wish.
If so, please email me and I will call you.
Thank you.
Laura
E. Jordan, Esq.
LJordan@TheCapitalLawFirm.com
<image003.jpg>
Attorney/Client
Privileged, Protected and Confidential Communication
The information contained in this e-mail message may contain
attorney/client privileged, protected and confidential material that is solely
transmitted for the purposes of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of
this message is not an intended recipient, or if this message has been
inadvertently directed to your attention, you are hereby notified that you have
received this message and any attached document(s) in error and that any review,
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail and delete and destroy all copies of the original message.
Except in instances in which we have made direct reference above
to redlining or "track changes" that are expressly conveyed for
review and consideration, it is the intent of the sender to remove all metadata
from all attachments to this email, and any metadata that may be found therein
has been produced inadvertently and should not be reviewed.
U.S. Treasury circular 230 notice. Any U.S. federal tax advice
included in this communication was not intended or written to be used, and
cannot be used, for purposes of avoiding U.S. federal tax penalties.
From: Haytham
[mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com]
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 7:00 PM
To: LJordan@TheCapitalLawFirm.com
Cc: Eric S. Montalvo
Subject: Michigan client-Virginia Case
I am attaching the documents forwarded to me by the attorney
working with the client in Michigan. The Michigan attorney does not represent
the client in this matter but provides them representation in other matters in
Michigan.
You may call me at 760-521-7934
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
Haytham,
I
hope you are doing well.
I
am attaching several documents from this Virgina case that we discussed last
week. Following your advise, I was able to convince the judge to allow
the client more time to obtain counsel and answer the outstanding motions.
From
my brief review of the case, there are two motions which have been rescheduled
for hearings for May 29. I am attaching both of them. I am also
attaching the original complaint.
I
am hoping that you find some time tomorrow to discuss. I would like to
set up an agreement in which we can both be co-counsel on this case. I
think the client needs a Virginia attorney as well as counsel here in Michigan.
Let
me know what time is good for you.
Sam
M. Fakih
Fakih
& Associates, PLLC
16030
Michigan Ave., Suite 200
Dearborn,
MI 48126
Phone:
313.846.6300
Fax:
313.846.6358
E-mail:
sfakih@fakihlaw.com
CONFIDENTIAL: This electronic message transmission
contains information from the law firm of Fakih & Associates, PLLC that we
consider to be confidential or privileged. The information is intended solely
for the recipient and use by any other party is not authorized. If you are not
the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received
this electronic transmission in error, please contact the sender above
immediately and delete this transmission. Thank you for your cooperation.
TO
COMPLY WITH IRS AND U.S. TREASURY REGULATIONS: You are advised that
any discussion of Federal tax issues in this communication (including any
attachments or references) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot
be used, by any person or entity, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that
may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or to promote, market or
recommend to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.