mrPink, I hope your math turns out to be right, but I count 2 claims dismissed in the initial court order, and 5 dismissed in the second amended complaint order.
There should have been 6 claims in total, but PNTV stuck an additional claim in the second amended complaint, which the courts denied as applicable.
What is interesting, is the potential teeny weeny wiggle room allowed in the language of the first claim judgement ...."insomuch as is premised on an implied contractual obligation that Defendants utilize dynamic ad insertion";
Is that what mediation is being based on?
As far as the other 4 are concerned, they appear to be dead in the water along with the first 2 claims dismissed in the first court order.
"IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 43) is GRANTED. The following claims are dismissed with prejudice: (1) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing insomuch as is premised on an implied contractual obligation that Defendants utilize dynamic ad insertion; (2) breach of fiduciary duty; (3) tortious breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (4) tortious interference with prospective economic advantage: and (5) fraudulent misrepresentation"
