Common use of Defendants Clause in Contracts

Defendants. X APPEARANCES XXXXXXXXX & XXXXX, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 000 Xxxxx Xxxxxx Xxx Xxxx, XX 00000 By: Xxxx X. Xxxxxxxx, Esq. Xxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Esq. XXXXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX, LLP Attorneys for Defendants ILKB, LLC, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, ILKB Too, LLC, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, and Xxxxx Xxxx 0 Xxxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxx, 00xx Xxxxx Xxx Xxxx, XX 00000 By: Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxx, Esq. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Esq. XXXXXX, Senior District Judge: INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Xxxxx Xxxxx and Dolphin Kickboxing Company (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring seven causes of action against Defendants ILKB, LLC (“ILKB”), Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxx, and Xxxxx Xxxxxxx (together the “Predecessor Defendants”): violation of the New York State Franchise Sales Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 680 et seq. (“NYSFSA”); breach of contract; common law fraud; negligent misrepresentation; violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1521 et. seq. (“ACFA”); tortious interference; and xxxxx ego, veil piercing and agency liability. Plaintiffs also bring one cause of action—successor liability—against Defendants ILKB Too, LLC (“ILKB Too”), Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, and Xxxxx Xxxx, each as successor by merger to ILKB (together, the “Successor Defendants,” and with the Predecessor Defendants, “Defendants”). Presently before the Court is Defendants ILKB, Xxxxxxxx, ILKB Too, Xxxxxxxxxx, and York’s (the “Moving Defendants”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6). For the reasons stated below, their motion is granted in part and denied in part.

Defendants. X APPEARANCES PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE TO THE HONORABLE ARTHUR J. GONZALEZ, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE: Xxxxx X. Dorsey, IV, court-approved examiner for NewPower Holdingx, Xxx. xxx XXXX Xxldings, Inc., as Plaintiff in the above-entitled adversary proceeding, hereby dismisses this adversary proceeding with prejudice. Dated: New York, New York _____________, 2006 DRAFT ---------------------------------- RUFUS T. DORSEY, IV Court-approvex Xxxxxxxx xxx XxxXower Holdings, Inc. and TNPC Holdings, Inc. 1500 Marquis Two Tower 295 Peachtree Center Avenue, N.E. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx 00000 (000) 000-0000 XX XXXXXXX xxxs _______ day of October, 2006. ----------------------------------------- Honorable Arthur J. Gonzalez United States Bankruptcy Judge EXHIBIT B XX XXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXX XXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX OF GEORGIA NEWNAN DIVISION In re ) Chapter 11 ) THE NEW POWER COMPANY, et al., ) Jointly Administered -- --- ) ) Debtors. ) Case Nos. 02-10835 through 02-10837 ) ____________________________________) Judge W. Homer Drake, Jr. WITHDRAWAL WITH PREJUDICE XX XXXXXXXXX & XXXXXOF EXAMINER TO EQUITY INTERESTS OF ENRON PARTIES Rufus T. Dorsey,. IV, P.C. Attorneys court-approved examiner for Plaintiffs 000 Xxxxx Xxxxxx Xxx Xxxx, XX 00000 By: Xxxx X. the Debtors NewXxxxx Xxxxxxxx, EsqInc. and TNPC Holdings, Inc. (the "Examiner") hereby withdraws, with prejudice, the Objection of Examiner to Equity Interests of Enron Parties [Docket No. Xxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx_____] filed by the Examiner on March 23, Esq2005. XXXXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXRespectfully submitted, this ____ day of __________, 2006 DRAFT ---------------------------------------------- RUFUS T. DORSEY, IV Court-approvxx Xxxxxxxx xxx XxxPower Holdings, Inc. and TNPC Holdings, Inc. 1500 Marquis Two Tower 295 Peachtree Center Avenue, N.E. Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx 00000 (000) 000-0000 XX XXXXXXX xxxs _______ day of October, 2006. --------------------------------------------- Honorable W. Homer Drake, Jr. United States Bankruptcy Judge EXHIBIT C WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP Attorneys for Defendants ILKBthe Reorganized Debtors 767 Fifth Avenue Xxx Xork, LLC, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, ILKB Too, LLC, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, and New York 10153 (212) 310-8000 Martin J. Xxxxxxxxxxx (XX 0000) Xxxxx Xxxx 0 X. Xxxxx (XR 0000) Xxxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxx, 00xx Xxxxx Xxx Xxxx, XX 00000 By: Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxx, Esq. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Esq. XXXXXX, Senior District Judge: INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Xxxxx Xxxxx and Dolphin Kickboxing Company (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring seven causes of action against Defendants ILKB, LLC (“ILKB”), Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxx, and Xxxxx Xxxxxxx (together the “Predecessor Defendants”): violation of the New York State Franchise Sales Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 680 et seq. (“NYSFSA”); breach of contract; common law fraud; negligent misrepresentation; violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1521 et. seq. (“ACFA”); tortious interference; and xxxxx ego, veil piercing and agency liability. Plaintiffs also bring one cause of action—successor liability—against Defendants ILKB Too, LLC (“ILKB Too”), Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, and Xxxxx Xxxx, each as successor by merger to ILKB (together, the “Successor Defendants,” and with the Predecessor Defendants, “Defendants”). Presently before the Court is Defendants ILKB, Xxxxxxxx, ILKB Too, Xxxxxxxxxx, and York’s (the “Moving Defendants”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6). For the reasons stated below, their motion is granted in part and denied in part.XXXXXX XXXXXX XANKRUPTCY CXXXX XXXXXXXX DISTRICT OF XXX XXXX

Defendants. X APPEARANCES XXXXXXXXX & XXXXXxxxxxx, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs MO 63090 and attention to the xxxxxx of said xxx- IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF FRANKLIN STATE OF MISSOURI XXXXXX X. XXXXXXX and, XXXXXX X. XXXXXXX, Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs, vs. ALL UNKNOWN AND UNBORN BENEFICIARIES, HEIRS, GRANTEES AND/OR SUCCESSORS TO THE ESTATE OF XXXXX X. XXXXXXX, DECEASED, and XXXXXXXX XXXXXX, Heir of Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxx and XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX, 000 Xxxxx Xxxxxx Xxx XxxxXxxxxx Xxxxx, XX 00000 By000-000-0000 You are further notified that, unless you file an an- swer or other pleading and serve the same on the Pe- titioner or his attorney or shall otherwise appear and defend against the aforesaid petition within forty-five days after the 4TH day of DECEMBER, 2019, judg- ment by default will be ren- dered against you. It is ordered that a copy hereof be published accord- ing to law and the provi- sions of Rule 54.12 in the MISSOURIAN, a newspa- per of general circulation published in the County of FRANKLIN, State of Mis- and for the adoption of the above-named child. The name of the court in which this action is pending and the names of all the par- ties to said suit are stated above in the caption hereof and the name and address of the attorney(s) for Petitioner are: Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx 000 Xxxxx XxXxxxxx Xxx. Ste. B Union, MO 63084 You are further notified that, unless you file an an- swer or other pleading and serve the same on the peti- tioners or their attorney or shall otherwise appear and defend against the aforesaid petition within forty-five days after the 27th day of NOTICE UPON ORDER FOR SERVICE BY PUBLICATION The State of Missouri to: All of the Unknown and/ or Unborn Heirs, Devisees, Grantees, Successors, As- signs, Donees, Alienees, Legatees, Administrators, Executors, Guardians, Mort- gagees, Trustees and Suc- cessors in Interest of Xxxx X. XxxxxxxxXxxxxxxxx. Lot # Purchaser /Owner Grave # 12 Xxxxxxxx Xxxx 3, Esq. Xxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx7, Esq. XXXXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX, LLP Attorneys for Defendants ILKB, LLC, Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, ILKB Too, LLC, Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, and Xxxxx Xxxx 0 Xxxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxx, 00xx Xxxxx Xxx Xxxx, XX 00000 By: Xxxxx X. Xxxxxxx, Esq. Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Esq. XXXXXX, Senior District Judge: INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs 8 16 Xxxxx Xxxxx and Dolphin Kickboxing Company (collectively1, “Plaintiffs”) bring seven causes of action against Defendants ILKB5, LLC (“ILKB”), Xxxxxxx Xxxxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxx, and Xxxxx Xxxxxxx (together the “Predecessor Defendants”): violation of the New York State Franchise Sales Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. L. § 680 et seq. (“NYSFSA”); breach of contract; common law fraud; negligent misrepresentation; violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-1521 et. seq. (“ACFA”); tortious interference; and xxxxx ego, veil piercing and agency liability. Plaintiffs also bring one cause of action—successor liability—against Defendants ILKB Too, LLC (“ILKB Too”), Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, and Xxxxx Xxxx, each as successor by merger to ILKB (together, the “Successor Defendants,” and with the Predecessor Defendants, “Defendants”). Presently before the Court is Defendants ILKB, Xxxxxxxx, ILKB Too, Xxxxxxxxxx, and York’s (the “Moving Defendants”) motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6). For the reasons stated below, their motion is granted in part and denied in part.6