Letter from Dave Clark viewsats lawyer

[brutus36]

We represent Viewtech in the pending litigation with Echostar/Dish Network. Recently, there has been a lot of false and malicious misinformation published on the internet about Viewtech and the case, and we want to make certain that any interested person knows the truth.

At a settlement hearing held last week, the case did not settle. Viewtech will now continue to vigorously defend against Echostar's claims, and pursue its counterclaims against Echostar. Viewtech will remain the market leader in FTA- receiver products and will honor its long-standing commitments to support, service and upgrade its product lines.

The Court has recently entered a temporary order which merely requires Viewtech to catalog customer identification information solely for those relatively few receivers which contain third-party software and are physically returned to Viewtech for repair. The Court has not been asked, nor has it ordered this information to be disclosed to Echostar or any other party. The Court order does not apply at all to Viewtech receivers that contain only Viewtech factory-installed software. Viewtech takes the privacy of our customers seriously and will vigorously oppose any effort to reveal this or any other customer identification information to EchoStar.

We will periodically provide updated information regarding this case to make certain that the Viewtech FTA community is informed, rather than swayed by false and misleading information put out by others who are hostile to Viewtech.

Thanks,
Dave Clark, Esq.
Manny de la Cerra, Esq.

[robby3333]

When was this letter written..?

[tyson01]

Yes, that must be very old

[Fallen Angel]

It does look pretty old Brut...Like from about a year ago...That's when all this happened and when VS was ordered to take the names and addy's of people sending back their receivers for support if they were using 3rd party software...That's what they appear to be talking about in the letter you posted...That would be around Oct 2008....

Actually, this letter would be around the same time as the one you posted:

09-23-2008 update

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ECHOSTAR SATELLITE LLC, a Colorado
Limited Liability Company, ECHOSTAR
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, a Texas
corporation, and NAGRASTAR L.L.C., a
Colorado Limited Liability Company,
Plaintiff,
v.
VIEWTECH, INC., a California corporation,
JUNG KWAK, an Individual and DOES 1-10,
Defendants.
))))))))))))))
Civil No. 07cv1273 W (AJB)
ORDER FOLLOWING SETTLEMENT
CONFERENCE
On September 17, 2008, the Court convened a Settlement Conference in the above entitled
action. Appearing were Mark Hamer, Esq., Chad Hagan, Esq., JJ Gee and Rob Frankel, client
representatives on behalf of plaintiffs; David R. Clark, Esq., Manny Delacerra, Esq., Jung Kwak and
Rob Rhine, client representatives on behalf of defendants.
The Court and counsel followed up on the settlement process discussed at the Early Neutral
Evaluation Conference. There was also discussion about the preservation of evidence allegedly
supporting the plaintiff’s claims and defendant’s defenses. While counsel work on a formal permanent
preservation plan, the Court imposes the following interim plan:
1. Starting September 22, 2008, defendant will preserve the chip from all of the units
returned to defendant for repair or warranty work which are accompanied by a check in
the approximate amount of $50.00. Defendant will assign a tracking number to each of them.


Orders to be filed\07cv1273 order fsettle.917.wpd2 07cv1273
these chips and record the unit’s serial number and the date of receipt for later transmission
to plaintiffs. Defendant will also record the information associated with the
person(s) or other entity that has returned the unit for the subject work. The production
of that information will be dealt with by the Court at some future date;
2. By October 6, 2008, defendants will provide a report to plaintiff’s counsel regarding the
chips collected and plaintiff may proceed to purchase any or all of those at $23.00 per
unit for forensic testing; and
3. The Court and counsel will review of the progress of this interim plan, and counsel’s
efforts to come up with a permanent preservation plan, at a telephonic Case Management
Conference set for October 24, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. Plaintiff’s counsel will initiate the
call.
In the interim, counsel have leave to take a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of defendant’s representative
with regard to repair and warranty return protocols. No later than Monday, September 22, 2008,
plaintiff’s counsel will provide defendants with the Rule30(b)(6) deposition notice describing the
specific areas of inquiry involved. As this deposition is limited in scope and relates to the issue of
preservation of evidence, it is excluded from the limit of ten depositions aside under the Federal Rules.
Counsel are also required to conduct their Rule 26(f) conference and submit their joint discovery
plan by October 24, 2008. At the next conference, the Court will confirm a date for initial disclosures,
and set further dates and deadlines as appropriate.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: September 17, 2008


FA

[brutus36]

no date..i post what i find.