RECE~VED
CLERK’S OFFICE
BEFORE THE ILLTh~1OISPOLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
FEB 17 2004
MATE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
)
STATE OF ILLINOIS
)
Pollution Control Board
Complainant,
)
)
V.
)
PCB No. 2004-075
)
(Enforcement X)
)
F.I.C. AMEPJCA CORPORATION,
)
)
Respondent.
)
COMPLAINANT’S RESPONSE TO
FIC’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY BRIEF INSTANTER
Complainant Mate Technologies, Inc. (“Mate”) hereby responds to Respondent FIC
America Corporation’s (“FIC” or “Respondent”) “Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief
Instanter” (the “Motion”). The purpose ofthis filing is to advise the Board as follows:
1.
Mate does not intend to substantively oppose the Motion, although Mate disagrees with
the positions stated therein (and although FIC has not shown that it will suffer any material
prejudice in absence offiling its reply, as required by 35111. Adm.Code
§
101.500(e)).
2.
Therefore, from Mate’s perspective, there exists no impediment to the Board’s ruling on
FIC’s motion to dismiss, or alternatively, strike, at its meeting on February 19, 2004.
Respectfully submitted,
MATE TECHNOLOG.
Carey S. Rosemarin (Atty. No. 6181911)
Law Offices of Carey S. Rosemarin, P.C.
500 Skokie Boulevard, Suite 510
Northbrook, IL 60062
847-897-8000
312-896-5786 (fax)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Carey S. Rosemarin, an attorney, hereby certiQv that I caused a copy of the foregoing
“Complainant’s Response to FIC’s Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief Instanter” to be served
upon:
Jeremy A. Gibson, Esq.
Mitchell S. Chaban, Esq.
Masuda, Funai, Eifert & Mitchell, Ltd.
One E. Wacker Dr.
Suite 3200
Chicago, IL 60601-2002
by regular U.S. Mail, on February 16, 2004.
)semarin
ofCarey S. Rosemarin, P.C..
Skokie Boulevard, Suite 510
Northbrook, IL 60062
847-897-8000
312-896-5786 (Fax)