Opinion
2:19-cv-01065-JAD-EJY
01-24-2022
ERNEST BOCK, L.L.C., Plaintiff, v. PAUL STEELMAN, individually; MARYANN STEELMAN, individually; PAUL STEELMAN, as trustee of the Steelman Asset Protection Trust; MARYANN STEELMAN, as trustee of the Steelman Asset Protection Trust; JIM MAIN, as trustee of the Steelman Asset Protection Trust; STEPHEN STEELMAN; SUZANNE STEELMAN-TAYLOR; PAUL STEELMAN as trustee of the Paul C. Steelman and Maryann T. Steelman Revocable Living Trust; MARYANN STEELMAN, as trustee of the Paul C. Steelman and Maryann T. Steelman Revocable Living Trust; PAUL STEELMAN, as the trustee of the Paul Steelman Gaming Asset Protection Trust; KEEPSAKE, INC.; SMMR, LLC; SMMR, LLC, SERIES A-Z; SSSSS, LLC; SSSSS, LLC, SERIES B; CHRISTIANIA, LLC; CHRISTIANIA, LLC, SERIES A-Z; COMPETITION INTERACTIVE, LLC; PAUL STEELMAN, LTD.; STEELMAN PARTNERS, LLP; PAUL STEELMAN DESIGN GROUP, INC.; SAPT HOLDINGS, LLC, SERIES B; AARON SQUIRES; and MATTHEW MAHANEY, Defendants.
Ryan T. Gormley, Esq., WEINBERG, WHEELER, HUDGINS, GUNN & DIAL, LLC, Local Counsel for Plaintiff, Ernest Bock L.L.C. John F. Palladino, Esq., Evan M. Labov, Esq., HANKIN SANDMAN PALLADINO WEINTROB & BELL, P.C., Pro Hac Counsel for Plaintiff, Ernest Bock L.L.C. SOLOMON DWIGGINS FREER & STEADMAN, LTD., ROBERTO M. CAMPOS, ESQ., Attorney for the Attorney Defendants. BALLARD SPAHR, LLP, MARIA A. GALL, ESQ., Attorney for the Corporate Defendants. BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP, FRANK M. FLANSBURG III, ESQ., EMILY A. ELLIS, ESQ., EMILY L. DYER, ESQ., Attorneys for the Steelman Defendants.
Ryan T. Gormley, Esq., WEINBERG, WHEELER, HUDGINS, GUNN & DIAL, LLC, Local Counsel for Plaintiff, Ernest Bock L.L.C.
John F. Palladino, Esq., Evan M. Labov, Esq., HANKIN SANDMAN PALLADINO WEINTROB & BELL, P.C., Pro Hac Counsel for Plaintiff, Ernest Bock L.L.C.
SOLOMON DWIGGINS FREER & STEADMAN, LTD., ROBERTO M. CAMPOS, ESQ., Attorney for the Attorney Defendants.
BALLARD SPAHR, LLP, MARIA A. GALL, ESQ., Attorney for the Corporate Defendants.
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP, FRANK M. FLANSBURG III, ESQ., EMILY A. ELLIS, ESQ., EMILY L. DYER, ESQ., Attorneys for the Steelman Defendants.
JOINT STIPULATION SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR PARTIAL MOTIONS TO DISMISS, MOTIONS TO STAY, AND ANTICIPATED COUNTERMOTION TO THE MOTIONS TO STAY (FIRST REQUEST)
ECF NO. 218
JENNIFER A. DORSEY U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.
Plaintiff Ernest Bock, L.L.C. (“Bock”) and Defendants, by and through their respective undersigned counsel, hereby submit this Joint Stipulation (the “Stipulation”) to set a briefing schedule for Defendants' Partial Motions to Dismiss and related joinders, [see ECF Nos. 202, 211, and 214], Defendants' Motions to Stay and related joinders, [see ECF Nos. 201, 210, and 215], and Plaintiff's anticipated Countermotion to Defendants' Motions to Stay (the “Substantive Motions”). Pursuant to LR 7-2(b), the deadline for Bock to file and serve a response to the Partial Motions to Dismiss and related joinders is fourteen (14) days after service of the Partial Motions to Dismiss, which were filed and served on January 10, 2022, and January 18, 2022. Pursuant to LR 7-2(b), the deadline for Bock to file and serve a response to the Motions to Stay and related joinders is fourteen (14) days after service of the Motions to Stay, which were filed and served on January 10, 2022, and January 18, 2022.
By separate stipulation and pending completion of said briefing schedule, the parties seek to continue and reset the hearing presently scheduled for February 14, 2022 before Magistrate Judge Youchah, [see ECF Nos. 205, 212, and 216], on Plaintiff's Motion to Extend and Defendants' Countermotion for a Protective Order and related joinders, [see ECF Nos. 197, 198, 206, and 208] (the “Discovery Motions”).
Bock has initiated this request and obtained the Defendants' agreement to submit this Joint Stipulation because: (i) there are ten motions in various stages of briefing and an anticipated Countermotion yet to be filed, [see ECF Nos. 197, 198, 201, 202, 206, 208210, 211, 214, and 215]; (ii) a unified briefing schedule is underway on the Discovery Motions; (iii) the interrelations and timing variations between the Substantive Motions would be clarified and simplified with a unified briefing schedule; and (iv) the Substantive Motions raise numerous, complicated issues that will determine whether and how this case proceeds.
Bock and the Defendants hereby stipulate to the following briefing schedule:
1. On or before February 2, 2022, Bock shall file its responses to the Partial Motions to Dismiss and related joinders, [ECF Nos. 202, 211, and 214], and the Motions to Stay and related joinders, [ECF Nos. 201, 210, and 215].
2. On or before February 2, 2022, Bock shall file any Countermotion to the Motions to Stay and related joinders, [ECF Nos. 201, 210, and 215].
3. On or before February 16, 2022, Defendants shall file any replies in support of the Partial Motions to Dismiss and related joinders, [ECF Nos. 202, 211, and 214], and the Motions to Stay and related joinders, [ECF Nos. 201, 210, and 215].
4. On or before February 16, 2022, Defendants shall file any responses to Bock's Countermotion to the Motions to Stay and related joinders.
5. On or before February 23, 2022, Bock shall file any reply in support of its Countermotion to the Motions to Stay and related joinders. Dated: January 20, 2022
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.