Ingenuity13 LLC v. John Doe

Filing 164

ORDER DENYING EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR STAY OF ENFORCEMENT (attached to Notice of Appeal); ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE ATTORNEYS FEE AWARD; Steele, Hansmeier, Duffy, Gibbs, AF Holdings, Ingenuity 13, and Prenda are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why they ha ve contravened the Courts order to pay the attorneys-fee award. The Court hereby imposes a penalty of $1,000 per day, per person or entity,1 until this attorneys-fee award is paid or a bond for the same amount is posted. This penalty shall be pa id to the Clerk of Court on the same day the attorneys-fee award is paid or the bond is posted. This penalty must be paid unless it is evident that the award was paid or the bond was posted on or before May 20, 2013. Failure to comply will result in additional sanctions.Upon motion and posting of a supersedeas bond, the Court will stay execution of the attorneys-fee award. Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(d). Finally, as a housekeeping matter, the Court requests Brett Gibbs to file requests for withdrawal of attorney in this and the related cases. Brett Gibbs appears to have withdrawn from these cases. Given the circumstances and the relationship between Gibbs and his clients, the Court will approve his requests for withdrawal by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. (lc). Modified on 5/21/2013. (lc).

O

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

INGENUITY 13 LLC,

12
13
14
15

v.

Plaintiff,

JOHN DOE,
Defendant.

Case Nos. 2:12-cv-8333-ODW(JCx)
ORDER DENYING EX PARTE
APPLICATION FOR STAY OF
ENFORCEMENT; ORDER TO
SHOW CAUSE RE ATTORNEY’SFEE AWARD

16

Prenda Law, Inc., through its attorneys at Klinedinst PC, filed a notice of appeal

17

to the Ninth Circuit. (ECF No. 157.) Oddly, to this notice of appeal, Prenda attached

18

an ex parte application seeking a stay of enforcement of the Court’s May 6, 2013

19

Order Issuing Sanctions. (ECF No. 157-1.) Not only was this application improperly

20

filed; but once again, Prenda resorted to an eleventh-hour plea for relief.

21

Even assuming this application was properly filed, the Court finds no basis to

22

grant Prenda’s request. Under the Court’s order, Prenda, along with John Steele, Paul

23

Hansmeier, Paul Duffy, Brett Gibbs, AF Holdings LLC, and Ingenuity 13 LLC, were

24

required to pay by May 20, 2013, an attorney’s-fee award of $81,319.72. By filing

25

this application, it appears no such payment was made.

26

Instead, an emergency motion was filed with the Ninth Circuit to stay

27

enforcement of the order. That motion was promptly denied. (ECF No. 150.) Prenda

28

now seeks to remedy a problem of their own making. By refusing to pay, or at least

1

refusing to post a supersedeas bond, Prenda (and the other parties) cannot establish

2

that it “is without fault in creating the crisis that requires ex parte relief, or that the

3

crisis occurred as a result of excusable neglect.” Mission Power Eng’g Co. v. Cont’l

4

Casualty Co., 883 F. Supp. 488, 492 (C.D. Cal. 1995).

5

therefore DENIED.

Prenda’s application is

6

Further, Steele, Hansmeier, Duffy, Gibbs, AF Holdings, Ingenuity 13, and

7

Prenda are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why they have contravened the

8

Court’s order to pay the attorney’s-fee award. The Court hereby imposes a penalty of

9

$1,000 per day, per person or entity,1 until this attorney’s-fee award is paid or a bond

10

for the same amount is posted. This penalty shall be paid to the Clerk of Court on the

11

same day the attorney’s-fee award is paid or the bond is posted. This penalty must be

12

paid unless it is evident that the award was paid or the bond was posted on or before

13

May 20, 2013. Failure to comply will result in additional sanctions.
Upon motion and posting of a supersedeas bond, the Court will stay execution

14
15

of the attorney’s-fee award. Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(d).

16

Finally, as a housekeeping matter, the Court requests Brett Gibbs to file

17

requests for withdrawal of attorney in this and the related cases. Brett Gibbs appears

18

to have withdrawn from these cases. (OSC Hr’g Tr. 87:1–8, Mar. 11, 2013 (“I am no

19

longer employed by Prenda or any other corporation or LLC that is involved in these

20

cases.”).) Given the circumstances and the relationship between Gibbs and his clients,

21

the Court will approve his requests for withdrawal.

22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23

May 21, 2013

24

____________________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25
26
27
28

1

That is, Steele, Hansmeier, Duffy, Gibbs, AF Holdings, Ingenuity 13, and Prenda.

2