Opinion
Case No. 2:12-CV-1099-GMN-PAL
01-25-2013
STELLIA LIMITED, a Maltese limited liability company; and STELLIA, LTD., a Nevada limited liability company, Plaintiffs, v. B+S CARD SERVICE GmbH, a German limited liability company, Defendant.
D. NEAL TOMLINSON, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 6851 KELLY H. DOVE, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 10569 SNELL & WILMER l.l.p. MARC J. GOTTRIDGE, ESQ. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) DAVID R. MICHAELI, ESQ. (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP Attorneys for Defendant B+S Card Service GmbH
D. NEAL TOMLINSON, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 6851
KELLY H. DOVE, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 10569
SNELL & WILMER l.l.p.
MARC J. GOTTRIDGE, ESQ.
(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
DAVID R. MICHAELI, ESQ.
(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
Attorneys for Defendant B+S Card Service GmbH
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT
Defendant, B+S Card Service GmbH, by and through its counsel of record, the law firms of Snell & Wilmer l.l.p. and Hogan Lovells US LLP, hereby move unopposed for an extension of time to file its Reply papers in further support of its Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. Expedited treatment is requested because the current deadline for Defendant to file its Reply papers is January 31, 2013. Without expedited treatment, the period may run before this Unopposed Motion is adjudicated.
This Motion is based upon the following Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the attached Declaration of D. Neal Tomlinson, Esq., the papers and pleadings on file, and any oral argument that the Court may allow.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Plaintiffs' counsel has expressly confirmed that they do not oppose Defendant's request for a modest extension of time in which to file its Reply in support of its Motion to Dismiss. See Declaration of D. Neal Tomlinson ("Tomlinson Decl."), attached as Exhibit 1. Defendant requests an additional nineteen days, making the Reply due on February 19, 2013.
In addition to Plaintiffs' agreement not to contest Defendant's request, there is good cause for allowing Defendant this additional time. The Motion and Response raise complex legal issues, including questions of personal jurisdiction over a German corporation under the nationwide "long arm" provision of Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(k)(2), forum non conveniens and interpretation of the Lanham Act, including the extent to which that statute has extraterritorial application. Moreover, Plaintiffs filed four separate declarations in opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (including an expert declaration on German law) and 13 exhibits. It will require some time to fully evaluate and respond to these papers. Finally, as Defendant's Motion explains at length, Defendant is a German entity with no presence in the United States. This makes it more complicated to prepare reply papers and confer with the Defendant about them, thus requiring more time than in the usual case.
Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally allows for the extension of time for a procedural deadline based on good cause. Local Rules 6-1 and 6-2 address the specific requirements for extension of time, including the extension of time to file a reply in support of a motion. Rule 6-2 specifically contemplates the submission of an unopposed motion to extend time such as the one submitted by Defendant herein. Based on the Court's broad discretion to grant Defendant's unopposed Motion and the good cause outlined above, Defendant's request for extension of nineteen days to Reply in support of its motion to dismiss should be granted.
It is further requested that the Court adjudicate Defendant's Motion on an expedited basis since the current deadline to reply is January 31, 2013, and will pass without expedited treatment.
Based upon the foregoing, the Defendant, B+S Card Service GmbH, respectfully requests that the Court grants its Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief in Support of Motion to Dismiss the Complaint on an expedited basis, giving Defendant up to and including February 19, 2013 to file its Reply papers.
SNELL & WILMER l.l.p.
________
D. NEAL TOMLINSON, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 6851
KELLY H. DOVE, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 10569
SNELL & WILMER l.l.p.
MARC J. GOTTRIDGE, ESQ.
(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
DAVID R. MICHAELI, ESQ.
(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
Attorneys for Defendant B+S Card Service GmbH
IT IS SO ORDERED this 25th day of January, 2013.
________
Gloria M. Navarro
United States District Judge