Bitcasa Wins Day in Court Over Restraining Order
Bitcasa had its day in court regarding the restraining order related to the end of its Infinite cloud storage plan, and the judge ruled in the cloud provider's favor.
November 24, 2014
Bitcasa has won its day in court after it was slapped with a restraining order preventing it from shutting down its Infinite cloud storage service and deleting any customer data not yet removed or shifted to its 1TB or 10TB service plans.
Headquartered in San Mateo, California, the cloud-based storage solutions provider issued the following statement to Talkin’ Cloud following its November 19 court date:
“Yesterday, U.S. District Judge William Alsup rejected Plaintiff Shawn Romack’s request to extend the initial temporary restraining order entered on November 13, 2014. We are pleased by the positive outcome and continue to believe that the suit is without merit.
“In our legal papers, we highlighted the risks of incurring an ongoing cost of $67,000 per day to comply with the court order — an extraordinary burden for any venture-backed company. Now alleviated from that uncertainty, Bitcasa can move forward with its planned transition, which sets the stage for profitable growth. Bitcasa’s management team and investors, which include Horizon Ventures and Pelion Venture Partners, continue to believe in and support the company’s vision.”
Romack filed a class-action lawsuit against Bitcasa prior to the planned November 15 shutdown of the service. As we noted last week on Talkin’ Cloud, the restraining order was issued by the U.S. District Court in Northern California, forcing Bitcasa to keep its unlimited cloud storage plan operational until at least November 20.
Romack and Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein had hoped to stretch that restraining order out, but with Alsup’s decision, Bitcasa is now free to shut down the service.
This doesn’t necessarily mean the end of the legal battle, as Romack could continue his class-action lawsuit against Bitcasa. The lawsuit alleges that Bitcasa “breached their contracts and violated California law.” Bitcasa executives believe otherwise.
About the Author
You May Also Like