TRINDADE v. Reach Media Group LLC, No. 5:2012cv04759 - Document 67 (N.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO AMEND THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT AND SERVE THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT by Judge Paul S. Grewal, granting 65 Motion for Extension of Time to Amend. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on 8/14/2013. (ofr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/14/2013)

Download PDF

TRINDADE v. Reach Media Group LLC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Doc. 67 JOSHUA M. BRIONES (Bar No. 205293) joshua. briones@dlapiper .com DLA PIPER LLP (US) 2000 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 400 North Tower Los Angeles, California 90067-4704 Tel: 310-595-3000 Fax: 310-595-3300 ALBERT E. HARTMANN (pro hac vice pending) albert.hartmann@dlapiper.com DLA PIPER LLP (US) 203 North LaSalle Street, Ste 1900 Chicago, IL 60601-1293 Tel: 312-368-4000 Fax: 312-236-7516 ERIN J. ILLMAN (Bar No. 236282) VISHALI SINGAL (Bar No. 267481) vishali.singal@dlapiper. com DLA PIPER LLP (US) 555 Mission Street, Suite 2400 San Francisco, CA 94105-2933 Tel: 415.836.2500 Fax: 415.836.2501 Attorneys for Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff REACH MEDIA GROUP, LLC 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 SAN JOSE DIVISION 14 15 DAVID TRINDADE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 17 18 CLASS ACTION Plaintiff, 16 v. REACH MEDIA GROUP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, 19 [Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 6(b)(1)(A)] 21 REACH MEDIA GROUP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, 22 Third-Party Plaintiff, 24 25 26 UNOPPOSED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO AMEND THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT AND SERVE THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT EAGLE WEB ASSETS INC. Defendant. 20 23 CASE NO 5:12-CV-04759 (PSG) Judge: Honorable Paul Singh Grewal Department: Courtroom 5 Complaint Filed: Sept. 12, 2012 Third-Party Complaint Filed: Nov. 15, 2012 v. RYAN LENAHAN, individually, KYLE DANNA, individually, and EAGLE WEB ASSETS INC., a corporation, Third-Party Defendants. 27 28 DLA PIPER LLP (US) SAN FRANCISCO UNOPPOSED MOTION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME CASE NO. 5:12-CV-04759 (PSG) Dockets.Justia.com 1 Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff Reach Media Group, LLC ("RMG"), by and through 2 its undersigned attorneys, respectfully requests that this Court extend (1) the 14-day deadline set 3 in this Court's July 31,2013 Order Denying Third-Party Defendants' Motion to Strike and 4 Granting-in-Part Motion to Dismiss ("Motion to Dismiss Order") to file any amended Third-Party 5 Complaint and (2) the 14-day deadline set in this Court's February 7, 2013 Order to Extend Time 6 for Service of any amended Third-Party Complaint on Third-Party Defendant Eagle Web Assets 7 Inc. ("EWA") following entry of the July 31, 2013 Motion to Dismiss Order. Plaintiff David 8 Trindade ("Plaintiff'), and Third-Party Defendants Ryan Lenahan ("Lenahan") and Kyle Danna 9 ("Danna") (collectively, the "Parties"), do not oppose this motion. (See Declaration ofVishali 10 Singal, Esq. in Support of Motion to Extend Time to Amend Third-Party Complaint and Serve 11 Third-Party Defendant Eagle Web Assets Inc. ("Singal DecI."), 12 I. 13.) Relevant Statement of Facts 13 a. 14 RMG filed a Third-Party Complaint in this matter on November 15, 2012 against Third- Procedural Facts 15 Party Defendants Ryan Lenahan, Kyle Danna, and EW A. (Dkt. #22.) RMG completed timely 16 service of process on Lenahan and Danna but encountered difficulty serving EW A with the 17 Third-Party Complaint. (Singal Decl., 2.) 18 During the Initial Case Management Conference ("CMC") in this matter on January 8, 19 2013, counsel appearing on behalf ofRMG, Vishali Singal, Esq., informed this Court that as of 20 January 8, 2013, RMG had encountered difficulty serving EWA with the Third-Party Complaint. 21 (Singal Decl., 22 additional month to effectuate service on EWA ofthe Third-Party Complaint. (Singal Decl., 23 Subsequently, during the CMC, this Court set a 30-day deadline for RMG to serve EWA with the 24 Third-Party Complaint, reflected in the Civil Minute Order of the same date. (Dkt. #37.) That 25 deadline corresponded with the date February 7, 2013. 3.) Ms. Singal further informed this Court that RMG likely required an 3.) 26 On or about January 10, 2013, Ms. Singal instructed Keith Nesbit, legal assistant at DLA 27 Piper LLP (US), to research addresses to serve process on EWA's Vice President of Accounting 28 or Vice President of Human Resources and to authorize a process server to DLA PIPER LLP (US) SAN FRANCISCO UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME CASE NO. 5:12-CV-04759 (PSG) 1 attempt service at the identified address(es). (Singal Decl., ,-r 4.) Ms. Singallearned on or about 2 January 10, 2013 that Mr. Nesbit located an address online that appeared to be associated with 3 Savy Lam, identified on EW A's website on January 10, 2013 as Vice President of Accounting. 4 (Singal Decl., ,-r 4, Dkt. #53-2.) As a result, Ms. Singal instructed Mr. Nesbit to authorize a 5 process server to attempt service of the Third-Party Complaint at that address. (Singal Decl., ,-r 4.) 6 One day later, on Friday, January 11, 2013, RMG was electronically served through this 7 Court's Electronic Case Filing system with Third-Party Defendants Lehanan's and Danna's 8 Notice of Motion and Motion to Strike And/Or Dismiss Third-Party Complaint and Memorandum 9 of Points and Authorities In Support Thereof ("Motion"). (Dkt. #38.) The Notice of Motion to 10 Strike And/Or Dismiss Third-Party Complaint ("Notice of Motion") specified a hearing date of 11 February 26, 2013. (Dkt. #38.) 12 Subsequently, on or about January 16, 2013, Ms. Singal learned that the process server 13 had unsuccessfully attempted service ofthe Third-Party Complaint on January 14, 2013 at the 14 address associated with Ms. Lam. (Singal Decl., ,-r 7.) In the meantime, RMG's counsel had 15 reviewed the Motion, and in light of its content, shifted their focus to preparing an opposition 16 brief to the Motion and considering the implications ofthe Motion on allegations and counts 17 stated in the Third-Party Complaint as to EW A. (Singal Decl., ,-r 6.) On or about January 22, 18 2013, Ms. Singal instructed Mr. Nesbit to obtain a background report for Mr. Eagle, to identify 19 additional addresses at which to attempt service of the Third-Party Complaint on EWA, and on or 20 about January 24, 2013, Ms. Singal received that background report. (Singal Decl., ,-r 8.) 21 22 On January 25, 2013, this Court reset the February 26, 2013 hearing on the Motion to March 12, 2013. (Dkt. #45.) 23 On or about February 5, 2013, the Parties stipulated to RMG's requested extension to 24 serve EWA with the Third-Party Complaint or an amended Third-Party Complaint of 14 days 25 from the date this Court issued its order on the Motion, or such other date and time thereafter as 26 the Court ordered, on the grounds that because the Third-Party Complaint asserts common 27 allegations and two causes of action against all three Third-Party Defendants, including EWA, 28 and that those allegations and causes of action the subject of the Motion, RMG sought to DLA PIPER LLP (US) SAN FRANCISCO UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME CASE NO. 5:12-CV-04759 (PSG) 1 await the outcome of the Motion in determining how it affected the content of the Third-Party 2 Complaint as to EWA and the decision to proceed against EWA. (Singal Decl., 9, Dkt. #53-1.) 3 On February 7, 2013, this Court entered an Order to Extend Time for Service of any 4 amended Third-Party Complaint on Third-Party Defendant EW A in this matter by 14 days 5 following the date this Court issued its order on the Motion ("Motion to Dismiss Order"). (Dkt. # 6 54.) 7 On March 12, 2013, this Court heard oral arguments on the Motion. (Dkt. #62.) 8 On July 31, 2013, this Court issued and entered the Motion to Dismiss Order, in which it 9 10 required that RMG file any amended Third-Party Complaint within 14 days of the date of the Motion to Dismiss Order, which corresponds with the date August 14,2013. (Dkt. #64.) Based on this Court's February 7, 2013 and July 31, 2013 orders, August 14, 2013 is the 11 12 deadline by which RMG must file any amended Third-Party Complaint and serve Third-Party 13 Defendant EWA with it ifEWA is still named as a Third-Party Defendant. 14 b. 15 At the present time, RMG is encountering severe financial difficulties. (Singal Decl., RMG's Financial Condition 16 12.) As a result ofRMG's weak financial condition, RMG is evaluating its available options to 17 address its financing and operating challenges. (Singal Decl., 12.) 18 II. Argument 19 Under FRCP 6, where an act "may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, 20 for good cause, extend the time [] with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request 21 is made, before the original time or its extension expires." FRCP 6(b)(l)(A). Here, RMG 22 respectfully submits a request for a 30-day extension of time to both file an amended Third-Party 23 Complaint and serve EWA with the amended Third-Party Complaint, before the deadline set by 24 this Court of August 14, 2013 to do so. 25 RMG requests a 30-day extension of time on the grounds that it requires this period of 26 time to fully evaluate its available options to address its financing and operating challenges. This 27 Court's resources, along with both existing and currently absent parties, will be conserved, which 28 otherwise might be expended on additional practice in response to an amended Third- DLA PIPER LLP (US) SAN FRANCISCO UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME CASE NO.5: 12-CV-04759 (PSG) 1 Party Complaint. The conservation of judicial resources and costs on the parties involved is good 2 cause for granting this request. Accordingly RMG respectfully requests through this motion that this Court extend the 3 4 deadline by which it must amend and serve the Third-Party Complaint to 30 days from August 5 14, 2013. The parties appearing in this action will not be prejudiced by this extension of time. 6 Plaintiff already propounded discovery requests on RMG and RMG served responses and 7 objections to these requests. (Singal Decl., 8 answer motions filed by Third-Party Defendants Lanahan and Danna, one jointly and the other 9 only by Lenahan, on July 31, 2013, and given that RMG has not yet propounded discovery on 5, 10.) Further, this Court ruled on the two pre- 10 either of them, Third-Party Defendants Lenahan and Danna currently have no discovery 11 obligations. (Singal Decl., 11; Dkt. #64.) Further, no trial schedule (or scheduling order) has 12 yet been issued for this case. Accordingly, this requested extension of time, the sixth extension of 13 time in this matter and the fourth request to this Court for an extension of time by RMG (Singal 14 Decl., 14), would have no impact on any such schedule. 15 III. 16 Conclusion For all these reasons, RMG respectfully requests that this Court grant Defendant and 17 Third-Party PlaintiffRMG's motion to extend time for amending the Third-Party Complaint and 18 serving EWA to 30 days following August 14, 2013. 19 20 21 22 23 24 Dated: August 13, 2013 DLA PIPER LLP (US) By: /s/ Vishali Singal ERIN JANE ILLMAN VISHALI SINGAL Attorneys for Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff REACH MEDIA GROUP, LLC 25 26 27 28 DLA PIPER LLP (US) SAN FRANCISCO -4UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME CASE NO. 5:12-CV-04759 (PSG) 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 Good cause appearing therefore, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff Reach Media Group, 3 LLC's deadline to amend its Third-Party Complaint and serve Third-Party Defendant Eagle Web 4 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Assets Inc. with the amended Third-Party Complaint is extended to _ _ days from August 14, 5 xxxxxx 2013. September 13, 2013. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 August 14 DATED: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , 2013 10 11 12 By ____________________________ HONORABLE PAUL SINGH GREWAL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DLA PiPER LLP (US) SAN FRANCISCO PROPOSED ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME CASE NO. 5:12-CV-04759 (PSG) 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I, Violet Rajkumar, declare: 3 I am a citizen of the United States and employed in San Francisco County, California. I 4 am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business 5 address is DLA Piper LLP (US), 555 Mission Street, Suite 2400, San Francisco, California 94105-2933. On August 13, 2013, I served a copy of the within document(s): 6 7 8 UNOPPOSED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO AMEND THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT AND SERVE THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT EAGLE WEB ASSETS INC. 9 10 11 DECLARATION OF VISHALI SINGAL, ESQ., IN SUPPORT OF UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO AMEND THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT AND SERVE THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT EAGLE WEB ASSETS INC 12 D 13 by personally delivering the document(s) listed above to the person(s) at the address( es) set forth below. By electronic service. I caused the documents to be sent on February 15, 2011 to the persons at the electronic notification addresses listed on the below Service List. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Benjamin H. Richman Rafey S. Balabanian Christopher L. Dore Edelson McGuire LLC 350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300 Chicago, IL 60654 312 589-6370 Fax: 312 589-6378 brichman@edelson.com rbalabanian@edelson. com Karl S. Kronenberger Jeffrey M. Rosenfeld Virginia A. Sanderson 150 Post Street Suite 520 San Francisco, CA 94108 karl@krintemetlaw.com j eff@krintemetlaw.com ginny@krintemetlaw.com I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. 26 27 28 DLA PiPER LLP (US) SAN FRANCISCO Sean Patrick Reis Edelson McGuire, LLP 30021 Tomas Street, Suite 300 Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 949-459-2124 Fax: 949-459-2123 sreis@edelson. com WEST\240669422.2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.