From Maura Larkins
to [WXYZ law firm]
date Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 1:06 PM
subject Are the clever folks at [WXYZ] trying to get Google to censor my blog?
When I got your email [yesterday] asking for extra time to respond to my opening brief, I knew that you wouldn't stop playing tricks just because I did you a favor. So I wasn't surprised to get some information today leading me to believe that you're using the extra time I gave you to complain to Google about my blog, rather than working on your opposition. You haven't got a leg to stand on constitutionally, so you figure you'll have to resort to other methods of shutting me up.
Here's the thing...When an injunction is appealed, it's mandatory aspect is stayed. So I don't have to go through my site erasing stuff. You might want to mention this to Google, unless your goal is to trick them.
Here's the hit from Google headquarters that made me suspect there was a complaint:
Domain Name google.com ? (Commercial)
IP Address 220.127.116.11 ? (Google)
City Mountain View
Time of Visit Nov 18 2010 9:34:39 am
Visit Length 5 minutes 7 seconds
(1) http://learningboosters.blogspot.com/2008/10/stutz-artiano-shinoff-holtz-lawyer-jack.html 307
Here's the email I got yesterday from this law firm:
to Maura Larkins
from [WXYZ law firm]
date Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:21 AM
subject Stipulation for extension of time
Good morning Ms. Larkins,
We have received your appellate opening brief and your appendix. However, due to the upcoming holiday and because of other timing issues, we respectfully request that you stipulate to a 30 day extension to file our responsive brief, pursuant to California Rules of Court Rule 8.212. Should you agree to such a stipulation, we would stipulate to grant you additional time to file your reply brief, if needed. Your cooperation is appreciated.