Southern California Institute of Law v. TCS Education System et al

Filing 20

DECLARATION of George A. Shohet in opposition to MOTION to Dismiss Case 14 filed by Plaintiff Southern California Institute of Law. (Shohet, George)

Southern California Institute of Law v. TCS Education System et al

Doc. 20

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

George A. Shohet SBN 112697 LAW OFFICES OF GEORGE A. SHOHET, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 245 Main Street, Suite 310 Venice, CA 90291-5216 Tel.: [phone] Fax: [phone] Gretchen M. Nelson SBN 112566 KREINDLER & KREINDLER LLP 707 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 4100 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Tel.: [phone] Fax: [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff Southern California Institute of Law UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF LAW, a California corporation, Plaintiff, vs. TCS EDUCATION SYSTEM, an Illinois corporation; DAVID J. FIGULI, an individual; and GLOBAL EQUITIES, LTD. d/b/a HIGHER EDUCATION GROUP, a Colorado limited liability company, Defendants.

CASE NO.: CV10-8026 PSG (AJWx) [Assigned to Hon. Philip S. Gutierrez] DECLARATION OF GEORGE A. SHOHET REGARDING DELAY IN FILING PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT TCS EDUCATION SYSTEM'S MOTION TO DISMISS Action Filed: Oct. 25, 2010 Hearing Date: March 21, 2011 Time: 1:30 p.m. Courtroom: 880

______________________________________________________________________________
DECLARATION OF GEORGE A. SHOHET REGARDING DELAY IN FILING PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT TCS EDUCATION SYSTEM'S MOTION TO DISMISS

Dockets.Justia.com

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

I, George A. Shohet, declare: 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the courts of California and a member of the Bar of this Court. I make this declaration for the purpose of explaining the short delay in filing Plaintiff's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendant TCS Education System's Motion to Dismiss ("Opposition Brief"). I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein and, if called as a witness, could and would competently testify about them. 2. By Order filed February 8, 2011, the Court granted the plaintiff until February 10, 2011 to file and serve its Opposition Brief. Doc. No. 18. I worked diligently to prepare the Opposition Brief, but due to computer problems apparently created by a network upgrade, I was unable to complete the brief in a timely manner. The problems began to occur near the end of the work day on February 10, 2011, as I was trying to finish the Opposition Brief. My computer kept closing Microsoft Office applications and shutting down. The night before my office's network received maintenance, including virus definition updates, operating system updates, application updates and firmware upgrades. My assistant who is also my firm's computer expert suggested that we revert the configuration back to the day before the network upgrade. Although this ultimately resolved the freezing and shuttting down issues, for some still unknown reason, the Opposition Brief Word file was corrupted. By now it was close to 7:00 p.m. and my assistant had tickets to attend a concert at the Walt Disney Concert Hall. After she left, I attempted to resolve the problem and worked in another document to complete the unfinished portion of the brief. I stopped working at 11:00 p.m. The next morning at approximately 8:00 a.m. my assistant and I began to recreate the damaged portion of the Opposition Brief in the new document I had started the night before. We finished the Opposition Brief on February 11, 2011

________________________________________1_____________________________________ _ DECLARATION OF GEORGE A. SHOHET REGARDING DELAY IN FILING PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM
OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT TCS EDUCATION SYSTEM'S MOTION TO DISMISS

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

sometime after 12:30 p.m. and filed and served it through the Court's ECF system at approximately 1:00 p.m. Doc. No. 19. 3. Due to other commitments, I did not contact TCS's counsel until approximately 4:45 p.m. on February 11, 2011, when I sent them an e-mail briefly explaining the computer problem and apologizing for the short delay. At that time, I requested that TCS stipulate to an extension of the deadline for the filing and service of the Opposition Brief. TCS's counsel was unwilling to do so and indicated that TCS would not seek to strike the Opposition Brief, but may comment on the untimlineness of the filing. 4. The hearing on TCS's motion to dismiss is set for March 21, 2011. TCS's reply memorandum is not due to be filed until March 7, 2011, over three weeks after the Opposition Brief was filed. Under these circumstances, it would appear that TCS is not being prejudiced in any way by the short delay in filing the Opposition Brief. Still, plaintiff's counsel regret any inconvenience the delay may have caused TCS or the Court. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed March 1, 2011 at Los Angeles, California.

George A. Shohet

________________________________________2_____________________________________ _ DECLARATION OF GEORGE A. SHOHET REGARDING DELAY IN FILING PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM
OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT TCS EDUCATION SYSTEM'S MOTION TO DISMISS

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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of the foregoing document via Central District of California CM/ECF system on March 1, 2011. ____/s/ George A. Shohet_______________

____________________________________________________________________________________________ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE