Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1369

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

NOBLE ROMAN’S, INC., )

)
Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, )
)
vs. ) No. 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB
)
AMI STORES MANAGEMENT, INC. )
AMI 57 LLC d/b/a AMI 70 FOOD MART, )
AMI 63 LLC d/b/a AMI 63 FOOD MART, and )
AMI 59, LLC )
)
Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs. )

NOBLE ROMAN’S, INC.’S ANSWER TO AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM

Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant/Third-Party Counterclaim Plaintiff, Noble Roman’s,

Inc. (“NRI”), by counsel, HOLLINGSWORTH ROBERTS MEANS LLC, pursuant to Fed. R.

Civ. P. 8(b) and 15(a)(3) for its response to the amended counterclaim filed by AMI Stores

Management, Inc., AMI 57 LLC d/b/a AMI 70 Food Mart, and AMI 63 LLC d/b/a AMI 63 Food

Mart (herein collectively referred to as the “AMI Parties”) on August 17, 2023 [Dkt. 68] (herein,

the “Amended Counterclaim”), states and alleges as follows:

ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM

1. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

2. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

3. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

1
Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 2 of 6 PageID #: 1370

4. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

5. NRI admits that, amongst other reasons, it had the right to terminate the franchise

agreements as alleged in paragraph 5 of the Amended Counterclaim.

6. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the Amended Counterclaim speak for themselves and

further denies these allegations as set forth in said paragraph 6.

7. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of the Amended Counterclaim speak for themselves and

further denies that the allegations set forth in said paragraph 7 accurately recite the written contract

terms.

8. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Amended Counterclaim speak for themselves and

further denies that the allegations set forth in said paragraph 8 accurately recite the written contract

terms.

9. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

the allegations contained in paragraph 9 of the Amended Counterclaim speak for themselves and

further denies that the allegations set forth in said paragraph 9 accurately recite the written contract

terms.

10. NRI states that the contract terms purportedly referenced and relied upon to form

the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of the Amended Complaint does not contain a “Section

SVII(a)(3)(n)” and therefore no answer to these allegations is required of NRI under the Federal

Rules.

2
Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 3 of 6 PageID #: 1371

11. NRI states that paragraph 11 of the Amended Complaint contains only a purported

description of a letter designated with NRI’s successful motion for partial summary judgment filed

in this case, as opposed to statements of factual allegations against NRI and thus no response is

required under Federal Rule 8(b). To the extent a response is required, NRI admits the existence

of the letter referenced in said paragraph 11, and that a true and accurate copy of the letter was

designated to support NRI’s successful motion for partial summary judgment.

12. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 12 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

13. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of the Amended Counterclaim

and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to comprise a

purported claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be

barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

14. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of the Amended Counterclaim

and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to comprise a

purported claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be

barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

15. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of the Amended Counterclaim

and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to comprise a

purported claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be

barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

16. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 16 of the Amended Counterclaim

and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to comprise a

3
Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 4 of 6 PageID #: 1372

purported claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be

barred under the doctrine of res judicata.

17. NRI denies the duplicative allegations contained in both paragraphs styled as “17”

of the Amended Counterclaim.

18. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 18 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

19. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 19 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

20. NRI admits the material allegations contained in paragraph 20 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

21. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 21 of the Amended Counterclaim

and further states that the allegations contained in said paragraph would appear to state a purported

legal claim which has already been decided by this court and one which would therefore be barred

under the doctrine of res judicata.

22. NRI denies the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of the Amended

Counterclaim.

WHEREFORE, NRI requests that the AMI Parties take nothing by way of their averments

and allegations made in their amended counterclaim pleading, for judgment in NRI’s favor, and

all other relief just and proper in the premises, including attorneys’ fees and the costs of this action.

ADDITIONAL DEFENSES

NRI, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(c), hereby asserts the following defenses in response to

the Amended Counterclaim filed by the AMI Parties:

4
Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 5 of 6 PageID #: 1373

1. Any allegations or rhetorical paragraphs contained in the Amended Counterclaim

which are not specifically admitted, denied, or responded to, are hereby denied.

2. The claims advanced in the Amended Counterclaim are barred under the doctrine

of res judicata.

3. The AMI Parties failed to mitigate any damages purportedly incurred by way of the

claims alleged in the Amended Counterclaim and are not entitled to recover any damages which

they have unreasonably failed to mitigate or avoid.

4. The AMI Parties are barred from recovery under the equitable doctrine of unclear

hands.

WHEREFORE, NRI requests that the AMI Parties take nothing by way of their averments

and allegations made in their amended counterclaim pleading, for judgment in NRI’s favor, and

all other relief just and proper in the premises, including attorneys’ fees and the costs of this action.

Respectfully submitted,

HOLLINGSWORTH ROBERTS MEANS LLC

/s/ Jeffrey D. Roberts

Jaime L. Meyer
Atty No. 23686-29
Jeffrey D. Roberts
Atty No. 23723-53
Ashley R. Roncevic
Atty. No. 30333-18
12801 E. New Market St.
Carmel, IN 46032
Office: (317) 569-2200
Facsimile: (317) 569-2210
jmeyer@hrmlaw.com
jroberts@hrmlaw.com
aroncevic@hrmlaw.com
Attorneys for Noble Roman’s, Inc.

5
Case 1:21-cv-01539-RLY-TAB Document 70 Filed 08/31/23 Page 6 of 6 PageID #: 1374

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that on August 31, 2023, the foregoing paper was filed electronically with

the Clerk of the Court using the Court’s Electronic Case Filing (ECF) System. Notice of this filing

will be sent to all parties by operation of the ECF system. The following parties may access this

filing through the ECF system.

Don Pinaud, Esq.

All Florida Justice, LLC
Law Office of Don Pinaud
4530 St. John Ave., Ste. 15-202
Jacksonville, FL 32210
don@allfloridajustice.com

/s/ Jeffrey D. Roberts

Jeffrey D. Roberts

HOLLINGSWORTH ROBERTS MEANS LLC

12801 E. New Market Street
Carmel, IN 46032
Tel: 317-569-2200
Fax: 317-569-2210