This would be good news or neutral news, right?

[QUOTE=aggo;33926299]i honestly would rather her not post anymore at all


Right. Lets not get all confused by facts.

Requested deadline delay from Monday 'til Friday. Can't characterize it as bad.

Fwiw the PPA requested to be amicus curiae.

“Leave to participate as amicus is granted.”

Lawyers charge for time spent on phone or emails. Not sure if you really don't know this or you are trying to be funny.

Putting on the speculation hat, but doesn't asking for a deadline to be moved back what seems to be such a short amount of time imply that they're expecting it to be resolved very soon? I mean, why apply for a short extension when you could apply for a long one?

"In light of ongoing settlement negotiations"

This is the first time I recall someone actually referencing "settlement negotiations."

The actual letter: http://www.scribd.com/doc/101040987

**** is gonna go down on Friday.

I am assuming that if that 2nd rumor is true and there was a point where owners could have contributed to make players, when it got turned down is right about where Ivey filed his lawsuit?
So I am right in saying this Pokerstars deal isn't completely dead yet? We still have a chance of rivering our gutterball?

Can companies/the Government keep requesting extensions indefinitely in a case like this? Obv asking for just one week at a time when we know negotiations are ongoing has to be good, but it seems like they could just do it forever.

And now that I look at the scribd link Judge Sand singed it, so it's a wait till Friday? And shouldn't PS being requesting an extension too?

Currently have Rebecca Black's 'Friday' on repeat for good Friday karma.

Quick, can someone analyze this?!

Courts are well experienced with attorneys' procrastinations; because of that, extensions tend to have a sort of half life as they become more numerous. Commonly, first extension, 30 days; then 2 weeks, then 1 week, then very short time periods if any. That may be what we are seeing.

My other speculations are:
1. They think it will be settled in this time frame or it will take a lot longer.
2. They need this long to get their brief done and know they can keep on negotiating.
3. They ran it by the judge's clerk and were advised that any longer request would most likely not be approved.
4. A zillion other explanations we can't even imagine.

More Stall Tactics. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Drag it out and suck some more money out of Bitar and suck some more life out of the players, FFS..........................

The regulations require that a settlement above certain thresholds (more than $5M being one) be approved by the Deputy Attorney General, and given the Fast and Furious debacle, I doubt anyone is approving anything without Holder being in the loop.

The request for Alter Ego discovery is a necessary step in order to 'exhaust all pretrial motions including fugitive disentitlement' as is US policy, as I quoted directly from the asset forfeiture policy manual.

Gotta watch out for those 2 day stall tactics. So sneaky.

Are the extension and discovery linked? I would have thought they would have ask for more than 4 days.

Well, he's answering most of these e-mails during the day. Unless he's overestimating and clocking hours upon hours to answer the e-mails he gets from poker players, I doubt he's raking it in hand over fist answering questions sent his way.

Do you think I would have sent him 50 emails if he didn't say anything I consider valuable in them? He can't say much but most of the time he tries to answer your questions in a way he is allowed .

I have zero information on the matter, but I think it's fair to assume all the money is gone at this point? They couldn't pay the July salaries iirc...

Obviously you're right and most likely it is the case but I don't consider it a fact that Ifrah bills the hours he spends answering poker players their emails. I have never gotten the feeling he considers it as part of the job he was hired to do, and is doing it because he feels like it's the right thing to do. Maybe that's the optimist in me, but I think there's a decent chance he isn't billing for that .

I wish I could agree with your analysis.

You claim that

The policy manual requires the AUSA to exhaust the fugitive disentitlement motion prior to making a settlement with a 'fugitive' - anyone avoiding US criminal jurisdiction.

but what you quote doesn't support that claim. The quote doesn't mention concluding or signing off on a negotiation, or making a settlement; it talks about entering into or starting a negotiation. All the reports say that the DoJ has already done what the quoted passage advises against doing with a fugitive: enter into negotiations, undertake negotiations, and negotiate. Either the DoJ is ignoring its own guidelines, or more probably, this partof the guidelines does not apply because the negotiations are with the Pokerstars claimants, and those companies are not fugitives.

i still keep my black card in my wallet, hoping one day i'll flash it and get out of a speeding ticket or something. anyone else still do this?

On topic, wonder if the fact FTP asked for an extension that is 1 business day after the next iGaming hearing on the hill means anything?

Whether you can nitpick the settlement manual to find an exception; the sequence of events: a request for an extension for the purpose of certain "settlement communications," a failure to settle, and then a motion to conduct discovery for the purpose of supporting a disentitlement motion; suggests that direction was given, and received, with regard to settling certain issues, and following a process, precedent to a settlement. BTW, the settlement manual is not a criminal statute to be parsed for exceptions; rather it is a guideline to be followed in both substance and spirit.

I keep it in my wallet to earn back my FTP bankroll equity, one CCR at a time...

Maybe when PS made the offer the DOJ forgot to do it.....