lolwatagain
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2017
I actually think he needs to unless the court states that an opposition is unnecessary because the motion is denied. A timely filed motion to alter or amend a judgment reopens the earlier judgment. McNabola v. Chi. Transit Auth., 10 F.3d 501, 520-21 (7th Cir. 1993) ("Although a timely postjudgment motion opens up the earlier judgment and even permits the court to enlarge on the issues delineated by the motion the non-moving party may not then make its own untimely request for alteration of the judgment on a wholly independent ground"). As such, Russ' shitty motion is governed by LR 7-1, and unfortunately LR 7-1(d) applies.He doesn't actually need to, unless the court requests it, but he probably will. Russ has a heavy burden to overcome before the defense even needs to respond, and he's nowhere near it. It's not like this is something he defaults on if he doesn't. But if he does, he'd be entirely justified moving for fees on having more time wasted on this bullshit. Russ has already had a shot across the bow about his frivolous bullshit, and apparently he didn't take the hint.
(d) Failure to Respond.
Failure to respond timely to a motion, other than for summary judgment, may result in the court’s granting the motion without further notice.
I seriously doubt the court would grant Russ' shitty ass motion on that kind of technicality, but it's not a risk I would be willing to take. Unless the court decides to enter a ruling on the motion denying it before the 14 day deadline passes. Honestly, even a short one page opposition stating that Shitlips has not provided any satisfactory pleading showing inducement of Copyright Infringement would probably be enough. Or even just a paragraph stating that he's using the same arguments as his opposition to the motion to dismiss in an attempt to relitigate. Usually that gets Motions for Reconsideration denied.
But the more I think about it, the more I think Skordas should file a full opposition and stick Russ with the bill.