MAX Stipulation

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED. subject to the Order of this Court, that

1.  The Plaintiffs shall have 3 weeks from the entry of this Order to either file an amended complaint or file papers in opposition to the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.

2. If the Plaintiffs file an amended complaint, (a) the outstanding Motion to Dismiss will be automatically denied as moot, (b) Defendants will have 3 weeks from the date of the filing of the amended complaint to move against the amended complaint, (c) Plaintiffs will have 3 weeks to file papers in opposition to the motion, (d) any reply papers by the Defendants will be due in 2 weeks after the filing of the Plaintiffs' opposing papers; and (e) any grant of the Motion to Dismiss will be with prejudice.

3.  If the Plaintiffs do not file an amended complaint. and instead file papers in opposition \0 the Motion to Dismiss. the Defendants will have 2 weeks in which to file any reply papers. Any grant of the motion to dismiss will be with prejudice.
SEE REST HERE

NOTE:  Notice this was signed 31 January and posted (top of page) on Pacer on 22 Feb 2012.  I take it the three weeks are already up.  We will see if the plaintifs filed anything soon enough  . . .

SkunK
GreenShift is of course one of the defendants in this echo of the oil seed crushing plant deal in Montana.  If I can SkunK it down a bit the best I can tell the judge is saying to the plaintiffs you have three weeks to "file or get off the pot."  [Sorry Ladies, as a rule I do my best to avoid the vulgar, but in cases like this it just fits sooo well.]  The judge states twice that any motion to dismiss will be "with prejudice".  That is a head bump of a hint in GreenShift's favor. In my opinion - if they do not file within three weeks - these accusations can be considered baseless and GreenShift can stop paying lawyers to defend against baseless accusations.  "With prejudice" means they cannot refile the complaint.

"The inverse phrase is dismissal with prejudice, in which the plaintiff is barred from filing another case on the same claim. Dismissal with prejudice is a final judgment and the case becomes res judicata on the claims that were or could have been brought in it; dismissal without prejudice is not."  HERE

ps  My previous post rant is not exactly in response to anyone's particular post but an attempt to explain what I am trying to do and what I am not trying to do.  Confusion develops every once in a while when I do not occasionally explain my purpose.  My hobby is to provide informaion.  I sometimes provide my opinion.  Sometimes I just put out the information.   Your job should be to evaluate it.  No apologies are desired or required.  I just need to explian myself once in a while.