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:

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

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