I agree, Sky. If this doesn't look like a bit of quid pro quo, I'm blind ( sorry......for those of you on the Left Coast...visually handicapped). Of course there are clinkers I've played because I couldn't distinguish between some notes and a couple of flies( with wings) that landed on the sheet music.

• digEcor requests 3 claims of theirs (Lanham Act-Federal Unfair Competition, Common Law Unfair Competition, and Statutory Unfair Competition) be dismissed along with all claims against Fred Falk and William Blakeley.
• EDIG requests two counterclaims (defamation and tortious interference) be dismissed.
• EDIG requests all counterclaims remaining in EDIG's pleadings that seek monetary damage awards against digEcor be dismissed. WTF?

LL....Isn't the first item the lynch pin of digEcor's case? If they don't have that, what's left....of any real value or detriment to EDIG?

Is it possible or even most likely the judge laid down the "law" to induce this?

Be gentle!