United Pacific Energy Operations And Consulting, Inc. et al v. Gas And Oil Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 29

ORDER Shortening Time For Notice and Hearing of Motion, signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 6/3/2011. ( 28 Motion by Plaintiff Objecting to Sufficiency of Undertaking of Tearlach Resources set for hearing 6/9/2011 at 1:30PM in Courtroom 3 (OWW) before Judge Oliver Wanger.) (Gaumnitz, R)

1
2
3
4
5
.
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

UNITED PACIFIC ENERGY
OPERATIONS AND CONSULTING, INC.,
etc., et al.,

13

CASE NO. 1:11-CV-00756 OWW SMS
ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR
NOTICE AND HEARING OF MOTION

Plaintiffs,
[CCP §§ 720.710,720.770, 995.020,995.910,
995.920]

14
vs.
15
16
17

GAS AND OIL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
etc. et al.,

18
Defendants.
19
20
21

The Ex Parte Application of Plaintiff and Judgment Creditor UNITED PACIFIC

22

ENERGY OPERATIONS AND CONSULTING, INC. (“Plaintiff”), for an order shortening time

23

for notice and hearing of Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion and Motion Objecting to Sufficiency of

24

Undertaking of Tearlach Resources (California) Ltd. (the “Motion”), filed on June 2, 2011, has

25

been duly served and filed. The matter having been duly considered and submitted on the papers,

26

and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED BY THE COURT AS

27

FOLLOWS:

28

1. The Plaintiff’s application is granted and the Motion is deemed served on, and notice is
deemed given to, respondent Tearlach Resouerces California Ltd., the judgment debtor and the

1
2
3

levying officer.
2. The court clerk shall place the Plaintiff’s Motion on calendar for hearing at 1:30 p.m.
on June 9, 2011, in Courtroom 3 of the above-captioned court.

4

3. Respondents shall electronically file with the court and personally serve or serve by fax

5

upon all parties not yet registered for electronic filing opposition to the Motion by 4:00 p.m. June

6

7, 2011. Plaintiff shall electronically file and personally serve or serve by fax on all parties not

7

yet registered for electronic filing any reply to any opposition of respondents by June 8, 2011 at

8

4:00 p.m.

9

4. The Court finds that this Order is justified because without an order shortening time for

10

the subject Motion to be heard, Plaintiff would lose rights to object to the sufficiency of TRC’s

11

undertaking and because the loss of such rights would result in irreparable injury to Plaintiff since

12

Plaintiff would then lose adequate recourse to a surety to compensate Plaintiff for damages due to

13

any loss of security in valuable oil properties in case of invalidity of TRC’s third party claim,

14

which could prevent Plaintiff from satisfying its judgment.

15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

Dated: June 3, 2011

/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER
United States District Court Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 2 -