Asia Economic Institute et al v. Xcentric Ventures LLC et al

Filing 115

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Relief from Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffss' First Amended Complaint filed by aei, rAYMOND mOBREZ, iLIANA lLANERAS Asia Economic Institute, Iliana Llaneras, Raymond Mobrez. Motion set for hearing on 9/20/2010 at 01:30 PM before Judge Stephen V. Wilson. (Blackert, Daniel)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Daniel F. Blackert, (SBN 255021) [e-mail] Lisa J. Borodkin, (SBN 196412) [e-mail] ASIA ECONOMIC INSTITUTE, LLC 11766 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 260 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone [phone] Facsimile [phone] Attorney for Plaintiffs, Asia Economic Institute, Raymond Mobrez, and Iliana Llaneras UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) XCENTRIC VENTURES, LLC, an ) Arizona LLC, d/b/a as BADBUSINESS ) BUREAU and/or ) BADBUSINESSBUREAU.COM ) and/or RIP OFF REPORT and/or ) RIPOFFREPORT.COM; BAD ) BUSINESS BUREAU, LLC, organized ) ) and existing under the laws of St. ) Kitts/Nevis, West Indies; EDWARD MAGEDSON an individual, and DOES ) ) 1 through 100, inclusive, ASIA ECONOMIC INSTITUTE, LLC, a California LLC; RAYMOND MOBREZ an individual; and ILIANA LLANERAS, an individual, Defendants. Case No.: 2:10-cv-01360-SVW-PJW NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS' THE FIRST AND SECOND CAUSES OF ACTION OF ACTION IN PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT [Declaration of Daniel F. Blackert filed concurrently herewith] Motion Date: September 20, 2010 Courtroom: 6 Time: 1:30 PM

TO DEFENDANTS AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD HEREIN:
26

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this Non-Opposition to Defendants' Motion
27

to Dismiss the First and Second Causes of Action in Plaintiffs' First Amended
28

Complaint is filed by Plaintiffs Asia Economic Institute, Raymond Mobrez, and
Motion for non-opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss- 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Iliana Llaneras, by and through their respective counsel of record, on the basis of the following: A. B. WHEREAS, the basis for Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint, was solely, wire fraud. WHEREAS, Plaintiffs concurrently move for leave to amend the pleadings to file a Second Amended Complaint which eliminates the First and Second Causes of Action for RICO, 18 U.S.C., Section 1962(c) and (d) predicated on wire fraud; C. WHEREAS, Defendants Motion to Dismiss is moot as it eliminates the causes of action for RICO, 18 U.S.C., Section 1962(c) and (d) predicated on wire fraud 18 USC, Section 1343 and asked Defendants to stipulate to the amendment (See Declaration of Daniel F. Blackert); D. WHEREAS, this Court at the hearing on July 12, 2010, and in the written Order dated July 19, 2010 ordered that the case remains bifurcated as to the RICO Causes of Action only (DN-94 at page 53: 15-16); E. WHEREAS, Defendants improperly seeks dismissal of the Third, Eleventh, and Twelfth, causes of action despite the Court's Order bifurcating the RICO Causes of Action and stating that it was inappropriate for Defendants to file a MSJ as to bifurcated State Law Causes of Action; F. WHEREAS, the Court, in its Order of July 19, 2010 stated: "Although Defendants moved for summary judgment as to Plaintiffs' entire case, such motion was inappropriate given the Court's prior Order bifurcating the RICO/Extortion claims from the remaining claims and from the issue of damages." (DN-94 at page 17 at 16-20)

Motion for non-opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss- 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

G.

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs will also promptly move to remand this action to California Superior Court, County of Los Angeles for determination of the remaining claims, which all arise under state law;

H.

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs will move to consolidate the hearings on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss with Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend the Pleadings, and Motion for Remand, in the interests of judicial economy and economy;

I.

WHEREAS, on August 14, 2010, Plaintiffs requested Defendants to stipulate to Plaintiffs proposed amendment on the RICO/wire fraud claims, Motion to Remand, however, Defendants have not responded.

NOW THEREFORE, the Defendants filed this Notice of Non-Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, in as much as it addresses the First and Second Causes of Action of Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint. DATED: August 16, 2010 By: DANIEL F. BLACKERT Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Asia Economic Institute, Raymond Mobrez, and Iliana Llaneras Asia Economic Institute /s/ Daniel F. Blackert

Motion for non-opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss- 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

EXHIBIT A
Motion for non-opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss- 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Meet and Confer ... Daniel Blackert <[e-mail]> From: ... View Contact To: Maria Speth <[e-mail]>; david gingras <[e-mail]> Cc: Lisa Borodkin <[e-mail]> I am writing this email to meet and confer with you regarding several issues. 1-We will respond to your Rule 11 Motion by amending our First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). We have analyzed our FAC very closely and will strike out certain paragraphs, however we do not plan to strike every paragraph mentioned in your Rule 11 Motion as we believe that many of your allegations which you characterize as untrue are, in reality, backed up by the evidence we have presented. 2-We will respond to your Motion to Dismiss by amending our FAC and striking out our wire fraud cause of action and then simultaneously moving to remand to State Court. 3-Likewise, we believe that by striking out our wire fraud claim your Motion to Dismiss essentially becomes moot as it only addresses the aspects of our wire fraud claim. 4-We will also file a Motion for reconsideration regarding the RICO/extortion cause of action. 5-We plan to make these filings on Monday so I would like to know your response to these issues and the possibility of resolving them absent Court intervention. 6-I am attaching the proposed amendments and requesting that you stipulate to review the issues above and consider stipulating to any of them. This would save the Court time and convenience, especially since we are dropping the wire fraud claim, your Motion to Dismiss is essentially and technically moot, so you may want to withdraw it; I think Judge Wilson will look favorably upon this.

7-Are you available any time either tomorrow (I know it is not a business day and I understand if you are unavailable but at your convenience I am available
Motion for non-opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss- 5

1 2 3

anytime before 3:30 PM) or Monday for a telephonic meet and confer? Thanks you and I look forward to resolving the issues addressed above, Daniel F. Blackert, Esq.

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Motion for non-opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss- 6