Replies to post #96184 on UnifiedOnline Inc fka UOIP

[Ranger185]

Still doesn't state where or what the actual harm would be for those who settled. Quite frankly no one outside the case gives a damn about the amount of the settlement or terms of the agreement and has no idea any of this has went on.

[long uoip]

"Mishcon de Reya only revealed the total settlement amount."

jennifer ying ~ "by contrast, UOI seeks to have the entirety of the settlement agreement made public." (BINGO, there's MORE $$$)

[long uoip]

202 DECLARATION re [201] Letter -- Declaration of Jennifer Ying -- by Non-Party Cable Companies. (Attachments: (1) Exhibits A-D)(Ying, Jennifer)


Jan 20, 2023

Main Doc­ument

Attach­ment 1

Exhibits A-D

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.76834/gov.uscourts.ded.76834.202.0.pdf

Evan Fried, an attorney in good standing to practice before the courts of the State of New
York, hereby states under penalty of perjury:
1. I am counsel to Plaintiff Mishcon de Reya New York LLP (“Mishcon NY”) in
this action, and, in that capacity, am familiar with the facts underlying this affirmation.
2. To the best of my knowledge, Mishcon NY discovered the alleged value of the
settlement in the “Chanbond Litigations” through an alternate source and was not in possession of the subject settlement agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) at the time it submitted its initial pleading.
3. Counsel for the parties in this action conferred and agreed that the settlement
value from the Chanbond Litigations is confidential.
4. The Settlement Agreement provides:
7.1 Nondisclosure. Each Party or its Affiliates, agrees not to disclose this
Agreement or the terms or conditions contained herein (collectively “Confidential
Information”) to any third party (other than its Affiliates or Departing Affiliates)
without the prior written consent of any other Party.
5. The Settlement Agreement provides for certain exceptions where a Party may disclose the terms of the Settlement Agreement, for example to a court if so compelled, however,
in such circumstances, the Settlement Agreement provides that the parties should take “reasonable steps [] to maintain the confidentiality of the Confidential Information,” (Settlement
Agreement § 7.2(b)), and a party must “exercise[] reasonable efforts, consistent with industry
terms, to obligate such third parties to maintain the confidentiality of the Confidential
Information.” (Id. § 7(d).)
6. The parties agreed work together to effectuate the redaction of the citations to the
alleged settlement value, i.e., Paragraphs 2 and 67 in the Complaint in this action. (Doc. 1.)
7. The parties contacted the Court, through the Hon. Jennifer Schechter’s law clerk,
Michael Rand. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is the correspondence with Mr. Rand. Mr. Rand
informed the parties to file a motion to seek the relief.
8. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a copy of the Complaint with the proposed
redactions.

Date: New York, New York
January 6, 2023

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ded.76834/gov.uscourts.ded.76834.202.1.pdf

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
CBV, INC., )
)
Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant, )
) C.A. No. 21-1456 (GBW)
v. )
)
CHANBOND, LLC, )
)
Defendant/Crossclaim- )
Defendant/Crossclaim-Plaintiff, )
)
DEIRDRE LEANE and IPNAV, LLC, )
)
Defendants/Counterclaim- )
Plaintiffs/Crossclaim-Plaintiffs. )
I, Jennifer Ying, declare as follows:
1. I am an attorney and member of the Bar of the State of Delaware. I am a partner
with the law firm of MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP which represents the Non-Party
Cable Companies.
2. I submit this declaration in support of the Non-Party Cable Companies’ letter brief
pursuant to the Court’s January 13 Order. (D.I. 200.) I know the facts set forth in this declaration
to be true of my own personal knowledge. If called as a witness, I could and would testify
competently to the matters set forth in this declaration.
3. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the declaration of Marcus
Delgado, executed January 20, 2023.
4. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the letter from counsel
for the Non-Party Cable Companies to counsel for Mishcon de Reya dated November 30, 2022.
Case 1:21-cv-01456-GBW Document 202 Filed 01/20/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 7082
2
5. Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of current docket of the
case pending in the New York state court styled Mishcon de Reya New York LLP vs. ChanBond
LLC et. al., Index No. 650575/2022.
6. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the Affirmation of Evan
Fried in support of Mishcon de Reya’s Motion to Seal, filed in the New York state court action
styled Mishcon de Reya New York LLP vs. ChanBond LLC et. al., Index No. 650575/2022.
I declare under penalty of perjury that to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing is true
and correct.
Executed this 20th day of January 2023 in Wilmington, Delaware.
/s/ Jennifer Ying

Jennifer Ying (#5550)
MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT &TUNNELL LLP
1201 North Market Street
P.O. Box 1347
Wilmington, DE 19899
[phone]
[e-mail]

[VC3]

Thanks for posting and for the highlighting.....very good points you make.....

[long uoip]

..so let me get this straight, greg & kamal own uoip shares (uoip is the entity that owns chanbond) BUT THEY CAN'T ACCESS documents regarding chanbond.. .the company that is owned by uoip ? did I get that right jen ?

jen ying ~ "On May 19, 2022, Gregory Collins and Kamal Mian, two shareholders of UnifiedOnline,
Inc. (“UOI”) (the entity that owns ChanBond), moved to intervene in this action seeking to unseal
various filings, including filings containing the amount of the underlying settlement. (D.I. 101.)
Collins and Mian (the “UOI Shareholders”) claimed to have been “unduly hampered in their
efforts” by the under-seal filings when previously moving to intervene derivatively on behalf of
UOI. (Id. at 1.) In their motion, the UOI Shareholders stated that one of the documents they seek
to unseal is an arbitration award filed by ChanBond that contained a reference to the underlying
settlement amount. (Id. at 6.) Their motion, however, does not reference or cite any filing of the
underlying settlement agreement itself. (Id.) In their reply, the UOI Shareholders, with no citation
to any filed document, request that the “Court unseal all records filed in this case, including a fully
unredacted version of the Settlement Agreement.” (D.I. 120.)

[long uoip]

NOTICE THE DISTINCTION ~

jen ying ~ "The Non-Party CableCompanies also immediately filed a letter with this Court requesting that the underlying settlement agreement and its terms, including the total settlement amount, remain confidential. (D.I. 190.)"

page 2 (above legal standard)

so there's a PUPORTED leaked settlement amount.. .and another version that they DO NOT WISH to be unsealed