From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ADT Sec. Servs. Inc. v. Sec. One Int'l, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 17, 2011
CIVIL ACTION No. C 11-05149 JW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2011)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION No. C 11-05149 JW

11-17-2011

ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff, v. SECURITY ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC., FRANK GARDINER, CLAUDIO HAND, MARCOS HAND and THOMAS NEMETH, Defendants.

Harry "Hap" P. Weitzel, Esq. (SBN 149934) PEPPER HAMILTON LLP M. Kelly Tillery, Esq. 1 Noah S. Robbins, Esq. 1 PEPPER HAMILTON LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff ADT Security Services, Inc.


Harry "Hap" P. Weitzel, Esq. (SBN 149934)

PEPPER HAMILTON LLP

M. Kelly Tillery, Esq.

Noah S. Robbins, Esq.1

PEPPER HAMILTON LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiff ADT Security Services, Inc.

Judge James Ware

STIPULATION FOR AGREED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

WHEREAS, Plaintiff ADT Security Services, Inc. ("ADT") has filed a Complaint against, among others, SECURITY ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC., FRANK GARDINER and CLAUDIO HAND ("Defendants") alleging that they have made certain misrepresentations to ADT's customers;

WHEREAS, Defendants deny the allegations in the Complaint;

WHEREAS, ADT has moved, in connection with its Complaint, for a Preliminary Injunction enjoining Defendants from making any alleged misrepresentations and specific misconduct;

WHEREAS, a hearing on the Preliminary Injunction was scheduled before the Court on November 14, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 9 at the Phillip Burton Federal Building & United States Courthouse, 19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102, and was continued to 1:30pm at the request of ADT and SECURITY ONE and,

WHEREAS, the parties wish to save the Court and themselves the expense and time involved with a Preliminary Injunction hearing;

The parties hereby voluntarily stipulate that a preliminary injunction be entered along the following terms:

1. Defendants, their agents, servants, employees, officers, attorneys, successors, and assigns are PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED pending further Order of this Court, from:

a. Informing ADT customers that ADT has authorized SECURITY ONE to take over or handle the accounts or technical support service for ADT customer accounts;

b. Informing ADT customers that SECURITY ONE has "bought out" ADT and is ADT's new security service provider;

c. Informing ADT customers that ADT is not capable of handling its existing clients and therefore is giving SECURITY ONE ADT customer accounts;

d. Representing to ADT customers that SECURITY ONE is affiliated with ADT and that ADT has authorized SECURITY ONE to provide an "upgrade" to ADT's security system;

e. Informing ADT customers that ADT is transferring select accounts to SECURITY ONE to receive a better rate;

f. Making any false statement that SECURITY ONE is an agent of ADT.

g. Making a false statement to any ADT customer that ADT is no longer doing business, or has limited or eliminated any services;

h. Making any material false statement of fact regarding ADT including, but not limited to, function, performance, capabilities, specifications, features, requirements, reliability, availability, origin, sponsorship, approval, or design of any ADT equipment, alarm system, sales, or service.

i. Making calls by telephone to any ADT call center or customer support hotline posing as an ADT customer or potential customer.

2. Nothing contained herein is intended to or shall constitute an admission of fact or liability on the part of any party. All parties shall retain all defenses to all claims and counterclaims now existing or hereafter filed.

3. This Stipulation for Agreed Preliminary Injunction does not constitute any finding of fact or law on the merits of Plaintiff s claims or Defendants' defenses nor shall it be admissible for any purpose whatsoever, except as may be necessary to prove any violation hereof.

4. Any person or entity subject to this Stipulation for Agreed Preliminary Injunction who fails to comply herewith and/or any person or entity that in any way interferes with the execution and implementation of the terms of this Preliminary Injunction shall be subject to the contempt power of this Court.

5. At any time, any party shall have the right to move to amend or dissolve this Stipulation for Agreed Preliminary Injunction as necessary according to any development of facts or law.

PEPPER HAMILTON LLP

Harry "Hap" P. Weitzel

Attorneys for Plaintiff ADT Security Services, Inc.

SECURITY ONE INTERNATIONAL, INC.

By: _____________

Defendant

FRANK GARDINER

By: _____________

Defendant

CLAUDIO HAND

By: _____________

Defendant

PROOF OF SERVICE

F.R.C.P.5/C.C.P. § 1013a(3)/Cal. R. Ct. R. 2.260

I am a resident of, or employed in, the County of Orange. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to this action. My business address is: Pepper Hamilton LLP, Suite 1200, 4 Park Plaza, Irvine, CA 92614-5955.

On November 15, 2011, I served the following listed document(s), by method indicated below, on the parties in this action:

STIPULATION FOR AGREED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION


SEE A TTACHED SER VICE LIST

[×] BY U.S. MAIL

By placing [[] the original / [×] a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope(s), with postage fully prepaid, addressed as per the attached service list, for collection and mailing at Pepper Hamilton LLP, Suite 1200, 4 Park Plaza, Irvine, CA 92614-5955, following ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with Pepper Hamilton LLP's practice for collection and processing of documents for mailing. Under that practice, the document is deposited with the United States Postal Service on the same day as it is collected and processed for mailing in the ordinary course of business.

[] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY

By delivering the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelopes) or package(s) designated by the express service carrier, with delivery fees paid or provided for, addressed as per the attached service list, to a facility regularly maintained by the express service carrier or to an authorized courier or driver authorized by the express service carrier to receive documents.

Note: Federal Court requirement: service by overnight delivery was made [] pursuant to agreement of the parties, confirmed in writing, or [] as an additional method of service as a courtesy to the parties or [] pursuant to Court Order.

[] BY FACSIMILE

Before 5:00 p.m. on said date, 1 caused said document(s) to be transmitted by facsimile. The telephone number of the sending facsimile machine was (949) 863-0151. The name(s) and facsimile machine telephone number(s) of the person(s) served are set forth in the service list. The document was transmitted by facsimile transmission, and the sending facsimile machine properly issued a transmission report confirming that the transmission was complete and without error.

[] BY E-MAIL

By electronically transmitting the documents) listed above to the email address(es) of the person(s) set forth on the attached service list from the email address goldmanj@pepperlaw.com at approximately _____________. To my knowledge, the transmission was reported as complete and without error. Service by email was made [] pursuant to agreement of the parties, confirmed in writing, or [] as an additional method of service as a courtesy to the parties or [] pursuant to Court Order. See Cal. R. Ct. R. 2.260.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and the United States of America that the above is true and correct.

Executed on November 15, 2011, at Irvine, California.

Jennifer S. Allen

Type or Print Name

_____________

Signature

SERVICE LIST

THOMAS NEMETH

21250 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 500

Torrance, California 90503

Pro Hac Vice Applications pending.


Summaries of

ADT Sec. Servs. Inc. v. Sec. One Int'l, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 17, 2011
CIVIL ACTION No. C 11-05149 JW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2011)
Case details for

ADT Sec. Servs. Inc. v. Sec. One Int'l, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff, v. SECURITY ONE INTERNATIONAL…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Nov 17, 2011

Citations

CIVIL ACTION No. C 11-05149 JW (N.D. Cal. Nov. 17, 2011)