Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-5331THIS IS AN ~d~BITRATION MATTER. ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES HEARING REQUIRED. GORDON & WEINBERG, P.C. BY: FREDERIC I. WEINBERG, Identification No.: 41360 21 S. 21ST STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215/988-9600 ESQUIRE eIndia.comm, Inc. d/b/a eIndia Technology Solution 21300 Victory Blvd. Woodland Hills, CA 91367 vs. Delta Development, Inc. 2000 Technology Pkwy Ste. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 200 : : NOTICE COURT OF COMMON PLEJkS CUMBERLAND COUNTY DOCKET NO.OI--'g~/ YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND AGAINST THE CLAIMS SET FORTH IN THE FOLLOWING PAGES, YOU MUST TAKE ACTION WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS AFTER THIS COMPLAINT AND NOTICE ARE SERVED, BY ENTERING A WRITTEN APPEA=RANCE PERSONALLY OR BY ATTORNEY AND FILING IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGAINST YOU. YOU ARE WARNED THAT IF YOU FAIL TO DO SO THE CASE MAY PROCEED WITHOUT YOU AND A JUDGEMENT MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY THE COURT WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE FOR ANY MONEY CLAIMED IN THE COMPLAINT OR FOR ANY OTHER CLAIM OR RELIEF REQUESTED BY THE PLAINTIFF. YOU MAY LOSE MONEY OR PROPERTY OR OTHER RIGHTS IMPORTANT TO YOU. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CAiNNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. COURT ADMINISTRATOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT HOUSE, 4TH FLOOR 1 COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA 17013-3387 717-240-6200 THIS IS AN ARBITRATION MATTER. ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES HEARING REQUIRED. GORDON & WEINBERG, P.C. BY: FREDERIC I. WEINBERG, Identification No.: 41360 21 S. 21ST STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215/988-9600 ESQUIRE eIndia.comm, Inc. d/b/a eIndia Technology Solution 21300 Victory Blvd. Woodland Hills, CA 91367 vs. Delta Development, Inc. 2000 Technology Pkwy Ste. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 2OO plaintiff services, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY DOC,':ET NO.,O'-- t COMPLAINT IN CIVIL ACTION At the special instance and request of the defendant(s), sold and delivered to the defendant(s) merchandise and on the dates, of the kinds, in the amounts and for the prices set forth in a true and correct copy of plaintiff's books of original entry attached hereto, made part hereof, and marked Exhibit "A". 2. Defendant(s) accepted said merchandise and services without complaint. 3. The prices set forth in Exhibit "A" are the market prices for the said merchandise and services, and are the prices which the defendant(s) agreed to pay therefor. 4. All the credits, if any, to which the defendant(s) is(are) entitled are set forth in Exhibit "A". EXHIBIT "A " SENT ay: 'XAVTENT ~'~-CHNOLOGIES; elndla'Technology Solutions 21300 Victory Blvd., Suite 1200 Woo(tland Httl~. CA gl 367 Tel; 818-598 7500 Fax: 818-598 7580 5§87580; MAY-t6-01 ~0:24AM; invoice DATE INVOICE 8' 1/5/2001 1001-26 BILL TO Att: Bob Carbury 2000 Technology Parkway Suite 200 Mechenicsburg, PA 17050 CONSULTANT Sha~qAkh~r I"~0 Number .~OB DE$CR[P'T[ON Net 1S Due Date 1~0~C01 Sales Person ..... On site consulting work for the p®~iod o! 10/02/00 to 10/15/O0 HOU~ ~.5 Total PROJECT AMOUNT 3,9~,00 $3,966.00 SENT BY:-×AVIENT TECHNOLGOIE~; 8i8 5§87580; NO. : 818.598.7590 Employee Name; Sllariq Akhtat Tit]e: Web D~e~er Emp~ Numar: 1050 ~s: ~ba~or ~pa~[: P~dout~n " 8u~r John - Dirt Sill', Time EJld Thlla R~gular Hm. Overtime HfS. 10/02100 9,00 5,00 10/o~O0 9.oo[ 7.~o 10 ' lo~o4mO 2.~5' 7A5 S ..... ~--' .... ........ 10/05/OO 9:30 4.00 , · wEEKLY TOTAI.~ . 37:30 0 ,', -' Employee Signature: [:)all: 10/10/00 Supervisor Signature: Dale: 10110/00 BE,BT BY: NAVIENT TEOHNOLOGIEB; 8t8 5987580; TANDON INFORMATION SOLUTIONS Your Global IT pertrmr 2125-8 Madera sirra Val~y. CA 80~,582,4410 Fax: 805.582.4431 818.598,7590 MAY-t~-0t t0:25AM; PAGE Title: Web Oeve~per EmplOYee N&i~e: Shariq Akhtar ~mployee Number: 1050 ~ Status: ~ Supervisor John Doucette 0epa~Fnent: pradcut~on Date Start Tirn~ ~ End Time Regular Hm. Overtime Hm. [ Total ~. t0103/00 10.30 6.o0 7:30 "10/04/00 12.3o: 4,30 4 .......... WEEKLY TOTALS 19:00 0 EmplOy~ Signature: Supervisor Signature: Data: 10/13100 Date' 10113/00 SHERIFF'S RETURN - CASE NO: 2001-05331 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND EINDIA.COMM INC ET AL VS DELTA DEVELOPMENT INC REGULAR DOUGLAS DONSEN , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County,Pennsylvania, who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon DELTA DEVELOPMENT INC the DEFENDANT , at 2000 TECHNOLOGY PKWY MECHANICSBURG, PA 17050 at 1140:00 HOURS, on the 1st day of October STE 200 by handing to ERIC CLANCY VICE PRESIDENT a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE , 2001 together with and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof. Sheriff's Costs: Docketing 18.00 Service 8.45 Affidavit .00 Surcharge 10.00 .00 36.45 Sworn and Subscribed to before me this ~/g~ day of ~ ; ProthOnotar~ So Answers: R. Thomas Kline 10/02/2001 GORDON & WEINBERG Deputy Sheriff In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Civil Division elndia.comm, Inc. d/b/a elndia Technology Solution 21300 Victory Blvd. Woodland Hills, CA 91367, Plaintiff Delta Development, Inc. 2000 Technology Pkwy Ste. 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050, Defendant Docket No. 01-5331 Civil Term TO: NOTICE TO DEFEND elndia.comm, Inc., d/b/a, elndia Technology Solution Plaintiff You are notified to file a written response to the attached Preliminary Objections within twenty (20) days from service hereof or a judgment may be entered against you. Michael D. Klein, Esquire Carl R. Shultz, Esquire LeBOEUF, LAMB, GREENE & MacRAE, L.L.P. 200 North Third Street, Suite 300 P.O. Box 12105 Harrisburg, PA 17108-2105 (717) 232-8199 Fax: (717) 232-8720 PA Supreme Court No. 24589 PA Supreme Court No. 70328 Attorneys for Defendant, Delta Development Group, Inc. In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Civil Division elndia.comm, Inc. d/b/a eIndia Technology Solution 21300 Victory Blvd. Woodland Hills, CA 91367, Plaintiff Docket No. 01-5331 Civil Term Delta Development, Inc. 2000 Technology Pkwy Ste. 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050, Defendant Order AND NOW, this day of ., 2001, upon consideration of the Preliminary Objections by the Defendant, Delta Development Group, Inc. ("Delta") to the Plaintiffs, elndia.comm, Inc., d/b/a, elndia Technology Solution ("elndia"), Complaint and elndia's response thereto, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: (a) Delta's demurrer to elndia's Complaint is granted. (b) Delta's preliminary objection for failure to join an indispensable party is granted. (a) Delta's demurrer to e nd~a s Prayer for the recovery of attorneys fees is granted. (b) elndia's Prayer for the recovery of attorneys fees is stricken with prejudice. elndia is ordered to more specifically plead the averments of Paragraphs 1 to 5 (inclusive) of elndia's Complaint. (a) Delta's preliminary objection based on elndia's lack of capacity to sue is granted. (b) further action concerning elndia's Complaint is stayed pending compliance with the Pennsylvania Fictitious Names Act. further action concerning elndia's Complaint is stayed pending compliance with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure by Counsel for elndia. eIndia's Complaint is dismissed. BY THE COURT: In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania Civil Division elndia.comm, Inc. d/b/a elndia Technology Solution 21300 Victory Blvd. Woodland Hills, CA 91367, Plaintiff Delta Development, Inc. 2000 Technology Pkwy Ste. 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050, Defendant Docket No. 01-5331 Civil Term DELTA'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO eINDIA's COMPLAINT The Defendant, Delta Development Group, Inc. ("Delta"), by and through its counsel, preliminarily objects to the Complaint of the Plaintiff, elndia.comm, Inc. d/b/a elndia Technology Solution ("elndia"), as follows: eIndia commenced this action by filing a Complaint. A true and correct copy of eIndia's Complaint, as it was served on Delta, is attached hereto (and incorporated herein by reference) as Exhibit 1. Rule 1028(a) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure permit preliminary objections to be filed to any pleading, including eIndia's Complaint. [Intentionally Left Blank] Legal Insufficiency of elndia's Cause of Action for Breach of Contract Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(4); Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(5). Paragraphs 1 to 2 (inclusive) of Delta's Preliminary Objections are hereby incorporated by reference. Under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Delta may raise a preliminary objection to the legal insufficiency ofeIndia's Complaint. See Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(4). elndia avers that the contract and actions upon which the subject Complaint are based were and are between eIndia and Delta. See eIndia's Complaint, ¶¶ 1-5. The "Time Sheets" which were attached to eIndia's Complaint (as a part of Exhibit "A") indicate that work was performed by an individual (Shariq Akhtar) who was an employee of Tandon Information Solutions at 2125-B Madera Road, Simi Valley, CA 93065 ("Tandon"). Based on said "Time Sheets", Mr. Akhtar and/or Tandon have a joint interest with elndia in any claim and recovery under the alleged contract. The threshold requirement to establish a breach of contract is that a contract exist between the plaintiff and the defendant. e nd~a s Complmnt does not allege that ~t ~s the agent or representative for Mr. Akhtar and/or Tandon. 10. elndia's Complaint does not allege that it is entitled to compensation for the services performed by Mr. Akhtar during his employment with Tandon. 11. Neither Mr. Akhtar nor Tandon has joined this Action as a party. 12. No reason appears in elndia's Complaint for the omission of Mr. Akhtar and/or Tandon as a party. 13. Delta demurs to elndia's Complaint on the grounds that eIndia has failed to state a claim against Delta. 14. Alternatively, Delta preliminary objects because Mr. Akhtar and/or Tandon are a necessary and indispensable party to this Action and their absence requires that elndia's Complaint be dismissed. WHEREFORE, Delta respectfully requests that this Court sustain Delta's preliminary objection by way of demurrer and dismiss eIndia's Complaint. Alternatively, Delta respectfully requests that this Court sustain Delta's preliminary objection for failure to join an indispensable party and dismiss eIndia's Complaint. Legally Insufficiency of eIndia's Prayer for Attorney's Fees Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(4). 15. Paragraphs 1 to 14 (inclusive) of Delta's Preliminary Objections are hereby incorporated by reference. 16. eIndia avers that the contract and actions upon which the subject Complaint are based were and are between elndia and Delta. See elndia's Complaint, ¶ 1. See also the "Invoice" which was attached to elndia's Complaint as a part of Exhibit "A". 17. In its Prayer for Relief, elndia requests an award of attorneys fees. 18. In Pennsylvania, a party cannot be compensated for the trouble and expense of establishing its rights in a legal action. However, this general rule does not apply where a statute or agreement authorizes an award of attorneys fees. 19. elndia's Complaint does not aver any statute or agreement that authorizes the recovery of attorneys fees for a breach of contract. 20. Delta demurs to eIndia' s Prayer for Relief on the grounds that elndia is clearly precluded from attorney's fees under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. WHEREFORE, Delta respectfully requests that this Court sustain Delta's preliminary objection by way of demurrer and dismiss elndia's Prayer for Relief which seeks the recovery of attorneys fees with prejudice. Alternatively, Delta requests that elndia's Prayer for Relief which seeks the recovery of attorneys fees be stricken with prejudice. Insufficient Specificity in elndia's Complaint Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(3). 21. Paragraphs 1 to 20 (inclusive) of Delta's Preliminary Objections are hereby incorporated by reference. 22. Under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, Delta may raise a preliminary objection to the insufficient specificity of elndia's Complaint. See Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(3). 23. Rule 1019(f) requires that "averments of time, place and items of special damage shall be specifically stated." 24. Paragraph 1 of eIndia's Complaint alleges that a contract was formed between eIndia and Delta. 25. However, as indicated above, eIndia's Complaint does not allege that it is entitled to compensation for the services performed by Mr. Akhtar during his employment with Tandon. 26. Moreover, Paragraph 1 of eIndia's Complaint does not allege any time or place concerning the formation of said contract. 27. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of elndia's Complaint allege that merchandise was delivered from elndia to Delta. 28. However, nothing in elndia's Complaint describes any merchandise that was allegedly delivered from eIndia to Delta. 29. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of eIndia's Complaint and Exhibit "A" to eIndia's Complaint allege that work was performed for a certain number of hours at Delta's request. 30. However, nothing in elndia's Complaint describes the work that was allegedly performed at Delta's request. 31. Paragraphs 1 to 5 (inclusive) of elndia's Complaint uses the phrase "defendant(s)". 32. By using the phrase "defendant(s)", elndia appears to refer not only to Delta but also to other potentially responsible parties. 33. Pennsylvania law is clear that Delta is not responsible for the debts of others. 34. elndia's Complaint lacks sufficient specificity to apprise Delta of the issues to be litigated, to allow it to adequately prepare and assert defenses to elndia's allegations, and/or to identify and join any potentially responsible parties as additional defendants. WHEREFORE, Delta respectfully requests that this Court order eIndia to more specifically plead the averments of Paragraphs 1 to 5 (inclusive) of elndia's Complaint. 35. Lack of Capacity to Sue Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(5) Paragraphs 1 to 34 (inclusive) of Delta's Preliminary Objections are hereby incorporated by reference. 36. Based on the caption of elndia's Complaint, eIndia appears to be a California corporation. 37. eIndia did not procure a Certificate of Authority to do business from the Department of State of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania prior to the institution of this Action as required by Pennsylvania's Business Corporation Law. See 15 Pa.C.S. §§ 4121(a), 6121(a). 38. Based on Exhibit "A" to eIndia's Complaint, it appears that Mr. Akhtar performed services "on site". 39. If "on site" refers to Delta's Offices in Pennsylvania, such actions may constitute "doing business" in Pennsylvania for purposes of the Certificate of Authority requirement. See Pennsylvania's Business Corporation Law, 15 Pa.C.S. § 4122. 40. Based on the caption of elndia's Complaint, eIndia does business as eIndia Technology Solution. 41. The name "elndia Technology Solution" is a fictitious name within the meaning of Section 302 of the Pennsylvania Fictitious Names Act ("Names Act"), 54 Pa.C.S.A. § 302. 42. eIndia's fictitious name is not now registered with the Commonwealth and was not registered prior to the institution of this Action as required under the Names Act, 54 Pa.C.S.A. § 331(a). 43. Under the Names Act, no action can be maintained by a party using a non-registered fictitious name until registration and any other necessary compliance with the Names Act has occurred. 54 Pa.C.S.A. § 331. 44. elndia is, accordingly, without capacity to sue or maintain this Action and is barred from maintaining this Action against Delta under the Names Act. 45. Based on Invoice (which was part of Exhibit "A" to eIndia's Complaint), it appears that the alleged contract upon which elndia here sues was entered into by elndia using a non- registered fictitious name. 46. Under the Names Act, 54 Pa.C.S.A. § 331 (b), a plaintiffmust pay a $500 civil penalty to the Commonwealth before it is allowed to institute suit on a transaction where a non-registered fictitious name was used. 47. eIndia has not paid a $500 penalty to the Commonwealth in connection with the transaction upon which this Action is based. 48. Based on the above, eIndia is barred from instituting and maintaining this Action in this Court. WHEREFORE, Delta respectfully requests that eIndia's Complaint be dismissed for eIndia's lack of capacity to sue. Alternatively, Delta requests that elndia's Complaint be stayed pending elndia's compliance with the Pennsylvania Fictitious Names Act. Failure to Conform to Rule of Court Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(2) 49. Paragraphs 1 to 48 (inclusive) of Delta's Preliminary Objections are hereby incorporated by reference. 50. The Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure provide that any party may object to a pleading because of the failure of the pleading to conform to law or rule of court. Pa.R.C.P. No. 1028(a)(2). 51. eIndia's Complaint contains the endorsement for an attorney (Frederic I. Weinberg, Esq.) with the law firm of Gordon & Weinberg, P.C., 21 S. 21st Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103. 52. Rule 1023(a) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure requires that "[e]very pleading ... directed to the court.., ora party represented by an attorney shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's individual name." 53. The copy of eIndia's Complaint that was served on Delta does not contain any signature of any attorney representing eIndia. WHEREFORE, Delta respectfully requests that eIndia's Complaint be stayed pending compliance with the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure by Counsel for eIndia. WHEREFORE, Delta respectfully requests that its preliminary objections be sustained and elndia's Complaint be dismissed. Respectfully Submitted, Michael D. Klein, Esquire Carl R. Shultz, Esquire LeBOEUF, LAMB, GREENE & MacRAE, L.L.P. 200 North Third Street, Suite 300 P.O. Box 12105 Harrisburg, PA 17108-2105 (717) 232-8199 Fax: (717) 232-8720 PA Supreme Court No. 23854 PA Supreme Court No. 70328 Attorneys for Defendant, Delta Development Group, Inc. Exhibit 1 eIndia's Complaint (8 Pages) THIS IS AN ARBITRATION MATTER. ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES HEARING REQUIRED. GORDON & WEINBERG, P.C. BY: FREDERIC I. WEINBERG, Identification No.: 41360 21 S. 21ST STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215/988-9600 ESQUIRE eIndia.comm, Inc. d/b/a eIndia Technology Solution 21300 Victory Blvd. Woodland Hills, CA 91367 vs. Delta Development, Inc. 2000 Technology Pkwy Ste. 200 Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY DOCKET NO.O[- ,.C'~ / YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND AGAINST THE CLAIMS SET FORTH IN THE FOLLOWING PAGES, YOU MUST TAKE ACTION WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYSAFTER THIS COMPL~-INTA/~DNOTICEARE SERVED, BY ENTERING A WRITTEN APPEARANCE PERSON-ALLY OR BY ATTORNEY ;LND FILING IN WRITING WITH THE COURT YOUR DEFENSES OR OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAIMS SET FORTH AGA/NST YOU. YOU A_RE WARNED THAT IF YOU F/LIL TO DO SO THE CASE MAy PROCEED WITHOUT YOU AND A JUDGEMENT MAy BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU BY THE COURT WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE FOR ANY MONEY CLAIMED IN THE COF~PL;LINT OR FOR ANY OTHER CLAIM OR RELIEF REQUESTED BY THE PLAINTIFF. YOU MAY LOSE MONEY OR PROPERTY OR OTHER RIGHTS IMPORTANT TO YOU. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. COURT ADMINISTRATOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURT HOUSE, 4TH FLOOR 1 COURTHOUSE SQUARE CARLISLE, PA 17013-3387 717-240-6200 TRUE COPY FRoM RECO~D In TestbllOny who,'eof, I h~re unto set fllY~ld and the ~{~of,~id ~ m ~rli~le' ~. THIS IS AN ARBITRATION MATTER. ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES HEARING REQUIRED. GORDON & WEINBERG, P.C. BY: FREDERIC I. WEINBERG, Identification No.: 41360 21 S. 21ST STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 2'15/988-9600 ESQUIRE eIndia.comm, Inc. d/b/a eIndia Technology Solution 21300 Victory Blvd. Woodland Hills, CA 91367 vs. Delta Development, Inc. 2000 Technology Pkwy Ste. Mechanicsburg, PA 17050 200 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY DOCKET NO. CC~PLAINT IN CIVILA~Tt¢~3. 1. At the special instance and request of the defendant(s), plaintiff sold and delivered to the defendant(s) merchandise and services, on the dates, of the kinds, in the amo%mts and for the prices set forth in a true and correct copy of plaintiff,s books of original entry attached hereto, made part hereof, and marked Exhibit "A". 2. Defendant(s) accepted said merchandise and services without complaint. 3. The prices set forth in Exhibit "A" are the market prices for the said merchandise and services, and are the prices which the defendant(s) agreed to pay therefor. 4. All the credits, if any, to which the defendant(s) is(are) entitled are set forth in Exhibit "A". 5. Plaintiff has made demand upon the defendant(s) for payment of the amount due, but the defendant(s) has(have) failed and refused and still refuse(s) to pay the same or any part thereof. WHEREFORE, plaintiff claims of the defendant(s) the sum of $3,955.00 together with interest and attorney fees. GORDON & WEINBERG, P.C. POMS BY:. FREDERIC I. WEINBERG, ESQUIRE Attorney for Plaintiff VERIFICATION fac~ set fo~ ~ the forego~g Compla~t are true and corre~ to the be~ of my knowledge or information and belief. I make this Verification subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities, which provides that if I knowingly make false statements, I may be subject to criminal penalties. Print or Type Name ~ Sib~latlkre !~~ Form 9 - Page SE. NT BY: .XAVI'ENT ?"CHNGLOG~'E~; eIndla'Technology Solutions 213~ ~o~ ~., Suite 1200 T~; 81~598 75~ F~: 81~5~ 7680 iiZLL TO Delta Development Att.' Bob Carbury 2000 Technology Parkway Suite 200 Mechanlcsburg. PA 17050 1~Y-t6-01 t0:24AU; PAGE 2/4 invoice DATE INVOICE # 1/5/2001 1001-28 CONSUL'I'ANT PO Number Terms N~16 ~OB DE$CRJPT[ON On ~te oonmJl~g work to~ the pl~od of 10~2~0 to Due Date HOURS Sales Person J PRQ]ECT $-Z RATE Total AHOUN~' 3,9~.00 $3,956,00 , S,EN.T BY: ,~AVZENT TECHNOLOGZE~; ' FROP '; SDR'TE~OG lES 5§87580; MAY-tS-01 t0:2EAM; PAGE 4/4 TANDON INFORMA?ION SOLUTIONS Your ~/o~a/tit. ~a~teer Road ~ USA 805,582.4410 Fax: 805,582,4431 818.098.7560 E~ Number: 1060 , ~, ,,.,~.,,.~,,,a~, .,, John Oour,~te O~tl: OMe: 1~'10A~0 S~NT BY:.XAVTENT TECHNOLOGIES; 8t8 5987580; ,~. : gi~gGS1315 TANDON IN ,FORMA'IION SOLUTIONS 2i25-8 Madera Road Ern~N ~Ign~um: SUl~rYl~ot 8igr~Wm: DMe: 10113t00 Dm,,' 10/13/00 Verification I, Eric Clancy, state that I am the Secretary/Treasurer of Delta Development Group, Inc. ("Delta") and that I am authorized to make this verification on its behalf and that the facts set forth in the foregoing Preliminary Objections to the Complaint of the Plaintiff, eIndia.comm, Inc., d/b/a, eIndia Technology Solution ("eIndia") are true upon my personal knowledge, information and belief. I understand that my statements are made subject to 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. ' 4904, providing for criminal penalties for unswom falsification to authorities. Date: October ,,9,, 2001 Eric Clancy Certificate of Service Dated: October 5, 2001 I hereby certify that I have this day served a true and correct copy of the Preliminary Objections (together with a Proposed Order) by the Defendant, Delta Development Group, Inc. ("Delta") to the Plaintiff's, elndia.comm, Inc., d/b/a, elndia Technology Solution ("elndia"), Complaint upon the following party by registered mail, postage pre-paid, addressed as follows: Frederic I. Weinberg, Esquire Gordon & Weinberg, P.C. 21 S. 21st Philadelphia, PA 19103 (Counsel four elndia) l~Iichael D. Klein, Esquire Carl R. Shultz, Esquire LeBOEUF, LAMB, GREENE & MacRAE, L.L.P. 200 North Third Street, Suite 300 P.O. Box 12105 Harrisburg, PA 17108-2105 (717) 232-8199 Fax: (717) 232-8720 PA Supreme Court No. 23854 PA Supreme Court No. 70328 Attorneys for Defendant, Delta Development Group, Inc.