Quantec, LLC, Novo Point, LLC, and Iguana Consulting, LLC’s
Response to the Court’s Proposed Order of Transparency in
the Transfer and Deletion of Domain Names, Page 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
MANILA INDUSTRIES, INC. and §
NETSPHERE, INC., § CASE NO. 3:09-CV-988-F
§
PLAINTIFF, §
§
v. §
§
ONDOVA LIMITED COMPANY, §
§
DEFENDANT. §
QUANTEC, LLC, NOVO POINT, LLC, AND IGUANA CONSULTING, LLC’S
RESPONSE TO THE COURT’S PROPOSED ORDER OF TRANSPARENCY IN
THE TRANSFER AND DELETION OF DOMAIN NAMES
NOW COMES, Quantec, LLC, Novo Point, LLC, and Iguana Consulting, LLC’s
(“Pending Intervenors”) and files this Response to the Court’s Proposed Order of
Transparency in the Transfer and Deletion of Domain Names and would respectfully
show the Court the following:
I.
LENGTH OF TIME TO PROVIDE REASONABLE NOTICE FOR THE
OBJECTION OF DOMAIN NAMES
1.01 Pending Intervenors respectfully object to the reasonable notice which is
described in the Proposed Order of Transparency in the Transfer and Deletion of Domain
Names (“Proposed Order”). The Proposed Order states that Ondova shall provide all
interested parties notice before transfer or deletion of domain names occur. The number
of domain names which will be transferred or deleted dictates the specific amount of days
USCA5 1477
Quantec, LLC, Novo Point, LLC, and Iguana Consulting, LLC’s
Response to the Court’s Proposed Order of Transparency in
the Transfer and Deletion of Domain Names, Page 2
that must be given to the interested parties before a transfer or deletion of domain names
may occur.
1.02 Pending Intervenors do not object to the day requirements contained in the
Proposed Order for the transfer of domain names. However, Pending Intervenors object
to the day requirements for the deletion of domain names.
1.03 The renewal registration fees for most of the domain names that are
registered with Ondova as the registrar are currently being paid by the Pending
Intervenors. Ondova is deleting domain names from the domain name portfolio which do
not economically justify the payment of a renewal fee. The notice requirements in the
Proposed Order could cause Ondova the inability to recapture credits for domain names
that have been paid and renewed, but subsequently are deleted.
1.04 According to the terms with Verisign, which is the entity that receives the
renewal payments from Ondova, a registrar has forty-five (45) days to request a credit
from the day that a domain name is renewed. The notice requirement in the Proposed
Order will cause Ondova to potentially be unable to claim credits for domain names that
were paid, renewed, and later deleted due to the time sequence during this process.
Consequently, Ondova could lose money by being required to provide the amount of
notice as stated in the Proposed Order before domain names can be deleted.
1.05. The notice requirement contained in the Proposed Order could also be
interpreted as a right of first refusal to a lesser degree. Even though an interested party
cannot prevent the deletion of a domain name, it certainly has advance notice anywhere
from two (2) to ten (10) days that domain names will be deleted. Again, this time delay
USCA5 1478
Quantec, LLC, Novo Point, LLC, and Iguana Consulting, LLC’s
Response to the Court’s Proposed Order of Transparency in
the Transfer and Deletion of Domain Names, Page 3
could render Ondova unable to re-claim registration fees for domain names that were
paid, renewed, and subsequently deleted.
1.06 Pending Intervenors request that the Court only order that Manila and
Ondova provide a list of the domain names to be deleted to all interested parties in this
litigation without additional advance notice before deletion of the domain names may
occur.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Pending Intervenors respectfully
request that the Court only mandate that Manila and Ondova be ordered to provide a list
of the domain names to be deleted without any further requirements to all the interested
parties, and for any further relief, at law and in equity, to which the Pending Intervenors
are justly entitled.
Dated: February 5, 2010 Respectfully submitted,
CRAIG A. CAPUA
State Bar Card No. 03783950
ROYCE WEST
State Bar Card No. 21206800
/s/Craig A. Capua
WEST & ASSOCIATES, LLP
P. O. Box 3960
Dallas, Texas 75208-1260
Ofc.: (214) 941-1881
Fax: (214) 941-1399
ATTORNEYS FOR QUANTEC, LLC,
IGUANA CONSULTING, LLC, AND
NOVO POINT, LLC
USCA5 1479
Quantec, LLC, Novo Point, LLC, and Iguana Consulting, LLC’s
Response to the Court’s Proposed Order of Transparency in
the Transfer and Deletion of Domain Names, Page 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that on the 5
th
day of February, 2010, a true and correct copy of
the foregoing Quantec, LLC, Novo Point, LLC and Iguana Consulting, LLC’S
Response to the Court’s Proposed Order of Transparency in The Transfer and
Deletion of Domain Names was sent to the following counsels of record:
Via Facsimile (214) 526-5525
Charla G. Aldous
Aldous Law Firm
2305 Cedar Springs, Suite 200
Dallas, Texas 75201
Pro Se
Via Facsimile (214) 651-6150
Jeffrey H. Rasansky
Rasansky Law Firm
2525 McKinnon, Suite 625
Dallas, Texas 75201
Pro Se
Via Facsimile (214) 756-8662
John W. MacPete
Locke, Lord, Bissell & Liddell, LLP
2200 Ross , Suite 2200
Dallas, Texas 75202
Attorneys for Manila Industries, Inc.,
Netsphere, Inc., and Munish Krishan
Via Facsimile (972) 788-2667
James Krause
Friedman & Feiger
5301 Spring Valley Road
Suite 200
Dallas, Texas 75254
Attorney for Jeffrey Baron
/s/Craig A. Capua
Craig A. Capua
USCA5 1480
