Free Statement - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

EXHIBIT 45

Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR

Document 85-42

Filed 12/23/2005

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 HYPERCOM, 13 Defendant. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Despite two prior orders of this court, plaintiff has failed to obtain substituted counsel on its behalf. Plaintiff cannot represent itself in this proceeding. The court has before it a notice of appearance by Richard A. Halloran on behalf of Verve, but only with respect to the defense of the counterclaim asserted against Verve and not in connection with Verve's complaint. Also before the court is Richard Halloran's motion for stay of proceedings and to amend the pretrial schedule (doc. 165). No good cause has been shown for the repeated failure of plaintiff to comply with the orders of this court. Nor has good cause been shown to upset this court's Rule 16 scheduling order. Accordingly, Richard Halloran's motion for stay of proceedings and to amend the pretrial schedule is DENIED (doc. 165). And because Verve has no one to represent it in connection with its complaint, pursuant to this court's order of November 15, 2005, IT IS ORDERED dismissing Verve's complaint for lack of prosecution under Rule 41(b), Fed. R.
Document 85-42 Filed 12/23/2005 Page 2 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

VERVE L.L.C., Plaintiff, vs.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV-05-365-PHX-FJM ORDER

Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Civ. P. Richard Halloran's notice of appearance states that he represents Verve only in connection with the counterclaim and not in connection with the complaint. Accordingly, all that remains of this case is the counterclaim and Richard Halloran represents Verve in connection with that counterclaim. DATED this 12th day of December, 2005.

-2Case 2:04-cv-00400-PGR Document 85-42 Filed 12/23/2005 Page 3 of 3