Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-00869-KAJ

Document 44

Filed 03/07/2005

Page 1 of 3

FIRM and AFFILIATE OFFICES NEW YORK LONDON CHICAGO HOUSTON PHILADELPHIA

THOMAS P. MCGONIGLE DIRECT DIAL: 302.657.4946 E-MAIL: [email protected] www.duanemorris.com

SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO BOSTON WASHINGTON, DC ATLANTA MIAMI PITTSBURGH NEWARK ALLENTOWN WILMINGTON HARRISBURG PRINCETON WESTCHESTER

March 7, 2005 E-FILED The Honorable Kent A. Jordan United States District Court District of Delaware Lockbox 10 844 King Street U.S. Courthouse Wilmington, Delaware 19801

Re:

Regen v. iGames Entertainment, Inc., et al, C.A. No. 04-869 (KAJ)

Dear Judge Jordan: This firm represents defendants iGames Entertainment, Inc., Available Money, Inc. and Christopher M. Wolfington (collectively referred to herein as "iGames") in the above-referenced matter. I am writing to provide a status report as required by Your Honor's Scheduling Order. 1. Nature and History of the Action:

Plaintiffs, Helene Regen and Samuel K. Freshman (collectively "Plaintiffs"), filed a fivecount Verified Complaint on or about July 15, 2004 against iGames, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and rescission based on theories of: (1) fraud in the inducement of the Stock Purchase Agreement of January 6, 2004 between the parties (the "SPA"); (2) mistake; (3) rescission; (4) breach of contract; and (5) conversion. On or about July 19, 2004, Plaintiffs filed a Motion For Standstill Order/Temporary Restraining Order and an accompanying Opening Brief (Plaintiffs' Opening TRO Brief"), which Plaintiffs presented to Judge Farnan. On July 20, 2004, Judge Farnan issued a Memorandum Order finding the matter is not an emergency requiring the immediate attention of a judicial officer and directing the matter for routine assignment. On August 10, 2004, iGames filed its Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' Verified Complaint With Prejudice Or For Summary Judgment Or, Alternatively, To Transfer Venue To The United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Pennsylvania, and an accompanying Opening Brief ("iGames' Motion To Dismiss Or Transfer").
D UANE M ORRIS LLP
1100 NORTH MARKET STREET, SUITE 1200 WILMINGTON, DE 19801-1246 WLM\206209.1 PHONE: 302.657.4900 FAX: 302.657.4901

Case 1:04-cv-00869-KAJ

Document 44

Filed 03/07/2005

Page 2 of 3

The Honorable Kent A. Jordan March 7, 2005 Page 2

On August 24, 2004, Plaintiffs filed their Answering Brief In Opposition To Defendants' Motion To Dismiss Complaint With Prejudice Or For Summary Judgment Or, Alternatively, To Transfer Venue ("Plaintiffs' Answering Brief"). Simultaneously, however, on August 24, 2004, Plaintiffs, without first obtaining leave of Court or the consent of iGames, filed their First Amended Verified Complaint, adding additional facts and two additional counts for declaratory relief and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (the "Amended Complaint"). Plaintiffs curiously cited to the Amended Complaint in their Answering Brief regarding the dismissal of their original Complaint. On August 25, 2004, by letter to Your Honor, iGames informed the Court that Plaintiffs' filing of their Amended Complaint rendered iGames' Motion To Dismiss Or Transfer moot and thus the Court need not consider that motion. In addition, iGames indicated it would file a responsive pleading to the First Amended Verified Complaint as required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. iGames subsequently filed a Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Verified Complaint Pursuant To Rule 12(b)(6) Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure Or For Summary Judgment. The parties' fully briefed that motion, and briefing was completed on October 4, 2004. A decision on that motion has not been rendered. 2. Discovery Deadline: Fact discovery is scheduled to be completed by June 24, 2005. 3. Status of Document Production:

On October 11, 2004, Defendants served on Plaintiffs a First Set of Requests for Production of Documents Directed to Plaintiffs and a First Set of Interrogatories Directed to Plaintiffs. No response has been received by Defendants. Despite two prior attempts by Plaintiffs to obtain an expedited discovery schedule, they have not served discovery, noticed depositions, nor answered Defendants' outstanding discovery requests. 4. Status of Depositions: Depositions have not yet been scheduled.

WLM\206209.1

Case 1:04-cv-00869-KAJ

Document 44

Filed 03/07/2005

Page 3 of 3

The Honorable Kent A. Jordan March 7, 2005 Page 3

5.

Settlement Discussions:

The parties have been actively involved in settlement discussions, however no resolution has been reached. Very truly yours,

Thomas P. McGonigle (I.D. No. 3162) TPM/lwk cc: Clerk of Court (by e-Filing)

WLM\206209.1