Battle Foam v. Outrider Hobbies Lawsuit Update

Battle Foam filed a motion today in response to the motion by Outrider to move the case from New Hampshire to Arizona. The full PDF is available for download below, but the main thrust of the filing is that New Hampshire is the correct venue for the lawsuit and the court should ignore Outrider’s motion. Battle Foam provides some New Hampshire stores that sell their products, game conventions attended in the region and the global reach of the internet as supporting evidence. One interesting bit was Battle Foam’s contention that Outrider’s motion is invalid because the owner, without a lawyer, filed the paperwork.  The argument is that under the applicable law, “pro se” representation is not allowed for a limited liability corporation.  A fascinating argument as it forces one side to hire a lawyer. I am very curious to see how the court rules, but there is no eta for a ruling in any of the filings. I will keep an eye on it and post when I have something new.

Battle Foam’s Response to the Change of Venue Motion from Outrider Hobbies

Trask, The Last Tyromancer

0 Shares

trask

Trask is a long-time gamer, world traveler and history buff. He hopes that his scribblings will both inform and advance gaming as a hobby.

9 thoughts on “Battle Foam v. Outrider Hobbies Lawsuit Update

  • Pingback:Battle Foam v. Outrider Hobbies Lawsuit Update | LivingDice.com « MI40k.com

  • May 1, 2010 at 1:04 pm
    Permalink

    fascinating stuff, I hope I never have to deal with something like this.

    some interesting points
    “On information and belief, Defendant Outrider Hobbies is a de facto corporation owned and operated by Mr. Bryan Wade.”

    It appears they do not know or do not have any evidence about how Bryan is structured as a business. I imagine if he is a sole proprietor he is well within his right to file “Pro se”

    I’m having a very difficult time finding any grounds to believe this case is in good faith.

    Thats a shame because I really wanted to buy a P.A.C.K. mini. well I would want one if the precut tray could actually hold my skirmish game minis (The slots are too small for 30mm bases that skirmish games use)

  • May 2, 2010 at 6:16 am
    Permalink

    Anyone know the patent number that was filed for this mysterious process of cutting foam on a low setting? And what kind of trade secret is it if someone knows how to cut foam just like Battlefoam does. Tons of folks out there doing the same damn thing. Frivolous. I would find it hard to find too many people out there ready to pay anything for Battlefool’s products for this disgrace.

    • May 2, 2010 at 9:17 am
      Permalink

      You ask questions about the patent and trade secret, and then form a conclusion that it’s frivolous… based on what exactly?

    • May 2, 2010 at 10:58 am
      Permalink

      This case is a trade mark issue. does the name “foam corps” in relation to “battle foam” confuse you as a member of the hobby games market.

      After having read the documents pertaining to this case I dont see a clear argument for battlefoam to pursue this case in good faith.

      As for the patent issue, given the patent is still pending approval, it’s impossible to review it to see if battlefoam is actually doing anything “novel”.

      Had battlefoam waited to do this AFTER the patent was approved I would be more likely give them the benefit of doubt.

  • May 2, 2010 at 4:25 pm
    Permalink

    If all this is about trademarks and patents, just what is the number of the patent application? No one seems to have that answer. It is against the law to say something is patent pending when it is not.

  • May 3, 2010 at 2:57 pm
    Permalink

    This is just further indication that Battle Foam is out to destroy a competitor through the cost of litigation in a distant place. The argument about Battle Foam’s attorneys being in New Hampshire and the difficulty of getting new counsel is pure BS. They have New Hampshire attorneys because they wanted to file someplace that would be burdensome for Outrider. There are plenty of competent attorneys in Arizona, which is a far more natural place for the lawsuit.

  • Pingback:GAMA Trade Show 2011 Vendors and Exhibitors Link List | LivingDice.com

  • Pingback:GAMA Trade Show 2011 Exhibitors and Vendors | LivingDice.com

Comments are closed.

Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami