<strong>12</strong>34567891011<strong>12</strong>13141516171819202<strong>12</strong>2COUNT V(Interference with Economic Advantage)247. 3taps repeats and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1through 195 as if fully set forth herein.248. This court has jurisdiction over this cause of action based on the doctrine ofsupplemental jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1367) because this cause of action arises from the sametransactions and from a common nucleus of operative facts as alleged in the federal causes ofaction alleged in this Complaint.249. 3taps had the reasonable probability of a business opportunity with partners in thespecialized search engine market, including with HuntSmartly, Invatory, for-sale-alert.com, listalert.com,Tempest, jumpoffcampus.com, wishcan.com, and SnapStore.250. craigslist has engaged in an anticompetitive scheme to exclude 3taps, craiggers, andJeBoom from the Relevant Markets. Through this scheme, craigslist intentionally interfered withthe opportunities that 3taps and its search websites were pursuing with many other developers,such as Lovely, HuntSmartly, Invatory, for-sale-alert.com, list-alert.com, Tempest,jumpoffcampus.com, wishcan.com, and SnapStore.251. craigslist’s unlawful conduct caused 3taps to sustain financial injury and damages toits business and property in an amount to be established at trial.252. These injuries are a direct and proximate result of craigslist’s interference with3tap’s prospective business relations.PRAYER FOR RELIEFWHEREFORE, 3taps demands that judgment be entered in its favor and against craigslist:23(a)declaring that craigslist has monopolized or attempted to monopolize the Relevant24Markets in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act;25(b)enjoining craigslist from unlawfully interfering with competition in the Relevant262728Markets by filing or threatening to file sham lawsuits, engaging in copyright misuse, imposingimproper Terms of Use on users, engaging in “ghosting,” demanding that general search engineslike Google cease caching craigslist content, and engaging in any other anticompetitive conduct.<strong>3TAPS</strong>’ <strong>ANSWER</strong> <strong>AND</strong> <strong>COUNTERCLAIM</strong>72CASE NO.: <strong>12</strong>-<strong>CV</strong>-3816-CRB
1(c)declaring that the conduct alleged in this Counterclaim is adjudged to be unfair23and/or unlawful in violation of Sections 17200 et seq. of the California Business and ProfessionsCode;4(d)awarding 3taps treble damages, reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, expenses, and such5further relief as the Court deems just and proper.67891011<strong>12</strong>1314Dated: September 24, 20<strong>12</strong>SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP/s/ Allen J. RubyAllen J. RubyAttorneys for Defendant<strong>3TAPS</strong>, <strong>INC</strong>.DEM<strong>AND</strong> FOR JURY TRIAL15Defendant and Cross-Complainant <strong>3TAPS</strong>, <strong>INC</strong>. hereby requests a jury trial in this matter.1617DATED: September 24, 20<strong>12</strong>SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP1819202<strong>12</strong>22324252627BY:/s/ Allen RubyAllen J. RubyAttorneys for Defendant<strong>3TAPS</strong>, <strong>INC</strong>.28<strong>3TAPS</strong>’ <strong>ANSWER</strong> <strong>AND</strong> <strong>COUNTERCLAIM</strong>73CASE NO.: <strong>12</strong>-<strong>CV</strong>-3816-CRB
Change language