Free Reply in Support of Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 27.2 kB
Pages: 3
Date: April 4, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 475 Words, 2,952 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/24006/210.pdf

Download Reply in Support of Motion - District Court of Arizona ( 27.2 kB)


Preview Reply in Support of Motion - District Court of Arizona
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

RYLEY CARLOCK & APPLEWHITE One North Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4417 Telephone: 602/258-7701 Telecopier: 602/257-9582 Michael D. Moberly ­ 009219 John M. Fry - 020455 Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
AMMAR HALLOUM, Plaintiff, vs. INTEL CORPORATION, Defendant. INTEL CORPORATION, Counterclaimant, vs. AMMAR HALLOUM and SAWSAN HAMAD, Counterdefendants. DEFENDANT/COUNTERCLAIMANT'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES No. CIV-02-02245-PHX-EHC

In opposition to Defendant/Counterclaimant's Motion for Attorneys' Fees, plaintiff/counterdefendant Ammar Halloum ("Mr. Halloum") asserts that

defendant/counterclaimant Intel Corporation (the "Company") "accepted" his payment of $7,045.00 in "full" satisfaction of the amount sought in its counterclaim. This assertion is not supported by any evidence in, or citation to, the record, and is patently false. Mr. Halloum's payment was made during the course of this litigation solely to satisfy the restitution portion of the sentence he received as the result of his
Case 2:02-cv-02245-EHC 3/30/07
756498.1

Document 210

Filed 04/04/2007

Page 1 of 3

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

criminal conviction. The Company presented evidence at trial in this case establishing that the payment did not fully satisfy his contractual obligation to the Company, and Mr. Halloum failed to refute the Company's evidence on this point. The Court's ruling in favor of the Company on its counterclaim was amply supported by the evidence presented at trial, and entitles the Company to an award of reasonable attorneys' fees under the terms of the parties' contract and the authorities cited in its motion. For those reasons, the Company respectfully submits that its request for an award of fees should be granted. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 4th day of April, 2007. RYLEY CARLOCK & APPLEWHITE

By s/ Michael D. Moberly Michael D. Moberly John M. Fry One North Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4417 Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant

Case 2:02-cv-02245-EHC

Document 210 -2- Filed 04/04/2007

Page 2 of 3

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
Case 2:02-cv-02245-EHC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on April 4, 2007, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing. I hereby certify that on April 4, 2007, I served the attached document by mail on the following, who are not registered participants of the CM/ECF System:

Ammar Halloum P.O. Box 26662 Tempe, AZ 85285 Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Sawsan Hamad 260 W. Buena Vista Dr. Tempe, Arizona 85284 Counterdefendant s/ Michael D. Moberly Michael D. Moberly

Document 210 -3- Filed 04/04/2007

Page 3 of 3