Free Status Report - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv—00027-G|\/IS Document 11 Filed 04/17/2007 Page 1 of 4 x
l
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE `
KENEXA TECHNOLOGY, INC., ) _ i
A Pennsylvania corporation, )
Plaintiff, j
h v. j C.A. No. 07-27-GMS
BLUELINX CORPORATION, g JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
A Georgia corporation, )
Defendant. g
JOINT STATUS REPORT
Plaintiff Kenexa Technology, Inc. ("Kenexa") filed the Complaint on January 12,
2007. On February 20, 2007, defendant BlueLinx Corporation ("BlueLinx") filed an
Answer and Counterclaim. On March l2, 2007, Kenexa filed a Reply to the I
i Counterclaim. On April 9, 2007, Kenexa filed a Motion to Amend the Complaint
asserting additional claims against BlueLinx and two new individual defendants.
Counsel for Kenexa and Blueliinx have conferred about each of the following matters.
l. Jurisdiction and Service — The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over
the action as originally filed. BlueLinx disputes that subject matter jurisdiction exists as
to the claims recently brought against the two new individual defendants. Kenexa has not
attempted service on the two new individual defendants because the Court has not yet
ruled on Kenexa’s Motion to Amend. BlueLinx disputes that the two new individual
defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court. _
2. Substance of the Action — Essentially, this is a breach of contract action
between Kenexa and BlueLinx. BlueLinx hired Kenexa to provide employment
outsourcing services. Kenexa claims BlueLinx breached the contract by terminating
l

Case 1 :07-cv—00027-GIVIS Document 11 Filed 04/17/2007 Page 2 of 4
Kenexa and otherwise failing to pay for services. BlueLinx denies that it breached the \
agreement and, in its counterclaim, asserts that Kenexa breached the contract by failing to l
properly perfonn its obligations under the contract. After BlueLinx terminated the q
contract, BlueLinx hired two _fgrr_gr__er Kenexa employees, which forms the basis for the
additional claims Kenexa seeks to add in the proposed amended complaint.
3. Identification of Issues — At this stage of the case, all material issues
remain in dispute. However, the parties agree there was a contract and that BlueLirrx
subsequently hired two of Kenexa°s former employees.
4. Narrowing of issues — The issues cannot be narrowed by agreement at
this time. The parties will make a good faith effort to do so as the case progresses.
5. Iggggf — The Kenexa/BlueLinx contract had a 5 year term and required
BlueLinx to pay $377,852 per quarter in the first year of the contract and $594,734 per
q quarter in years 2 through 5. Kenexa, inter alia, seeks to recoup those sums and seeks
injunctive relief in its proposed amended complaint. BlueLinx disputes the
aforementioned amounts, and by its counterclaim, seeks actual damages, including, but
not limited to, lost profits, the cost of replacement services, lost opportunities, harm. to
reputation, and legal fees and costs.
6. Amended Pleadings — Pending before the Court is Kenexa’s Motion to
Amend the Complaint,·which was filed on April 9, 2007. By its Motion, Kenexa seeks
leave to add two former employees of Kenexa to the case as defendants and assert
additional claims against BlueLinx for intentional interference with contractual relations,
breach of contract, and misappropriation of trade secrets. BlueLinx opposes the Motion
and briefing has not been completed.
` saw vl 2
I

Case 1 :07-cv—00027-GIVIS Document 11 Filed 04/17/2007 Page 3 of 4 \
7. Joinder of Parties — See #6 above.
1
8. Discovery —— Thelparties anticipate the exchange of written discovery and `
the taking of depositions. The scope of that discovery is not known at this time.
9. Estimated Trial Length — The parties anticipate a 3 to 5 day trial.
10. Jury Trial- Jury trial has been demanded.
ll. Settlement — The parties have conducted preliminary settlement
discussions and would be amenable to the Magistrate Judge’s involvement in connection
with dispute resolution.
% SEITZ, VAN OGTROP & GREEN, P.A. POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP
|Lon;,.»Q1/out/ina w{l·v\,&c»M\>>@»-
By: /s/ Kevin A. Gaerke By: /s/ David E. Moore
R. Karl Hill (#2747) Donald J. Wolfe, Jr. (#285) J
Kevin A. Guerke (#4096) Philip A. Rovner (#3215)
222 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1500 David E. Moore (#3983)
P. O. Box 68 Hercules Plaza
Wilmington, DE 19899 P. O. Box 951
(302) 888-0600 Wilmington, Delaware 19899
[email protected] (302) 984-6000
1 provner@potterandersoncom
Attorneys for Plaintyf [email protected]
Attorneys for Defendant -
Dated: April 17, 2007
58849 vl 3

Case 1 :07-cv—00027-GIVIS Document 11 Filed 04/17/2007 Page 4 of 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Kevin A. Guerke, Esquire, hereby certify that on this 17th day of April, 2007, the
attached document was electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF and was
electronically mailed to the following counsel:
Donald J. Wolfe, Jr.
» Philip A. Rovner
David E. Moore
Potter, Anderson & Corroon LLP
Hercules Plaza
P.O. Box 951
Wilmington, DE 19899
dwolfe@,pottera11derson.com
provne1·g@,potteranderson.com
[email protected]
/s/ Kevin A. Guer/ce
R. Karl Hill, Esquire (Bar No. 2747)
` Kevin A. Guerke, Esquire (Bar No. 4096)
SEITZ VAN OGTROP & GREEN, P.A.
222 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1500
P.O. Box 68
Wilmington, DE 19899
_ (302) 888-0600
khill(cQsvglaw.co1n
1
1
58850 vl