The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-2692i Andrew W. Barbin, Esquire ANDREW W. BARatN, P.C. 5020 Ritter Road, Suite 109 Mechanicsburg, PA 17013 (717) 506-4670 PERFECT SOLUTIONS, INC. 601 East Simpson Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-3456, Plaintiff Attorneys for Perfect Solutions, Inc. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW V. SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES, LTD. I Gatehall Drive, #301 Parsippany, NJ 07054, And SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LIMITED 271A Anna Sala!, Teynampet Chennai 600 018 India K7 00000 9140784322, Defendants Docket No. z ? - ';2 o d' n ' / PRAECIPE FOR A WRIT OF SUMMONS To: Curt Long, Prothonotary Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013-3387 Perfect Solutions, Inc., by and through counsel, Andrew W. Barbin, P.C., hereby files this Praecipe for a Writ of Summons to be issued to the Defendants, Satyam Computer Services, Ltd. and Satyam Computer Services Limited, in the form attached hereto. Respectfully st*t6itte' Andrew W. Barbin, Esquire Atty. I.D. 43571 ANDREW W. BARBIN, P.C. 5020 Ritter Road, Suite 109 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 717-506-4670 Attorney for Plaintiff Perfect Solutions, Inc. DATED:May 10, 2006 I A J k 1^I? V (^ Q O? c? c_ mri y:. 7Y Q 'V O c? -y} 1 J ICJ C? 7 0 Andrew W. Barbin, Esquire ANDREW W. BARBIN, P.C. 5020 Ritter Road, Suite 109 Mechanicsburg, PA 17013 (717) 506-4670 Attorneys for Perfect Solutions, Inc. PERFECT SOLUTIONS, INC. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS 601 East Simpson Street : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-3456, Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION - LAW V. SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES, LTD. 1 Gatehall Drive, #301 Parsippany, NJ 07054, And SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LIMITED 271A Anna Salai, Teynampet Chennai 600 018 India K7 00000 9140784322, Defendants Docket No. Al, . alvGa 4!4 WRIT OF SUMMONS To: SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES, LTD. SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LIMITED 1 Gatehall Drive, #301 271a Anna Salai, Teynampet Parsippany, NJ 07054 Chennai 600 018 India K7 00000 9140784322 You are hereby notified that Perfect Solutions, Inc. has commenced civil causes of action against you. DATED: Curt Long, Prothonotary eo Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013-3387 Cumberl d County Prothonot lYf By: Prothonotary or Depu ) (Seal of Court) Perfect Solutions, Inc. vs Case No. 06-2692 Protologics Corporation Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: Perfect Solutions, Inc. intends to Print Name Andrew d Ra rh i n Sign Name Date: f // /0 1 Attorneyfor Pei-fect Solutions, Inc. Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Ruffle of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. U Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the. parties do. not wish, to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall .enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated . . If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rute230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (dx3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). 13. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. ALED-0-lC OF THE Fi- npT,RY 2009 SEP -3 PM 3: {5 CU C Y f EINI?,r:> t L4 ray rGf: David D. Bueff (Prothonotary XirkS. Sohonage, ESQ, Solicitor ,F C/, ?750 Renee K. Simpson 15` Deputy Prothonotary Irene E. Morrow 2 d Deputy Prothonotary Office of the Prothonotary Cum6er(and County, (I'ennsykania SU'?f CIVIL TERM ORDER OF TERMINATION OF COURT CASES AND NOW THIS 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012, AFTER MAILING NOTICE OF INTENTION TO PROCEED AND RECEIVING NO RESPONSE -THE ABOVE CASE IS HEREBY TERMINATED WITH PREJUDICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PA R.C.P. 230.2. BY THE COURT, DAVID D. BUELL PROTHONOTARY One Courthouse Square • Suite 100 o Carlisle, PA 17013 • (717 240-6195 0 Fax (717 240-6573