Virtuallyblind.com (VB) has excellent coverage of Bragg’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss the Counterclaims of Defendant Linden Labs (for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted), filed on or about August 27. Failure to join an indispensable party 12(b)(7) is also asserted as grounds for dismissal. The US Legal Blog first took note of this case here.
VB editor, attorney Benjamin Duranske, lays out the most interesting passages from the Motion (worth reading) and discusses ably. An interesting debate with commenter “Ashcroft Burnham” (apparently a non-US attorney) follows.
I’m still holding to my opinion that this case will end in a draw, but with Bragg refunded all of his legitimately purchased property (prior to the exploit) and his seized cash account.