Entrepreneur Media, Inc.v. Smith

Filing 105

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/12/11 ORDERING that Smith's motion for an extension of time to file a revised opposition to EMI's motion for assignment of rights, a restraining order, and turnover order, 100 is gr anted; The hearing on EMI's motion for assignment of rights, a restraining order, and turnover order, 79 is continued to February 1, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 24; Smith may file a revised opposition to the motion on or before January 18, 2012; EMI may file a reply to Smith's opposition on or before January 25, 2012. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

ENTREPRENEUR MEDIA, INC.,
Plaintiff,

11
12
13

No. MISC. S-10-55 JAM EFB

vs.
SCOTT SMITH dba
ENTREPRENEURPR,

14
Defendant.
15
16

ORDER
/

This miscellaneous action, in which defendant is pro se, was referred to the undersigned

17

under Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(a). Presently noticed for hearing on

18

December 21, 2011 is judgment creditor and plaintiff Entrepreneur Media, Inc.’s (“EMI”)

19

motion for assignment of rights, a restraining order, and turnover order. Dckt. No. 79.

20

A judgment debtor examination of defendant and judgment debtor Smith occurred on

21

November 16, 2011. Dckt. No. 100. Pursuant to this court’s October 17, 2011 order, if the

22

judgment debtor examination mooted EMI’s motion for assignment of rights, a restraining order,

23

and turnover order, EMI was directed to “withdraw that motion on or before December 2, 2011.”

24

Dckt. No. 85 at 3. The October 17 order further provided that “[i]f new information arises as a

25

result of the judgment debtor examination and the motion for assignment of rights, a restraining

26

order, and turnover order is not withdrawn, Smith may file a revised opposition to the motion on
1

1

or before December 7, 2011.” Id. Additionally, EMI was permitted to “file a reply to Smith’s

2

opposition on or before December 14, 2011.” Id.

3

Because EMI did not withdraw the motion, on December 7, 2011, Smith filed a motion

4

for a 21 day extension of time to file a revised opposition to the motion. Dckt. No. 100. Smith

5

contends that based on emails he received from EMI’s attorney, he believes that “EMI will be

6

making knowingly false and misleading claims about [his] debtor exam.” Id. at 3; Ex. A. Smith

7

contends that he therefore needs “access to a copy of his debtor exam transcript so that he has the

8

opportunity to review and cite from the transcript for his revised opposition . . . .” Id. at 3-4.

9

Smith further contends that he contacted California Deposition Reporters about obtaining a copy

10

of the transcript, and was told that unless Smith paid nearly double the cost of the transcript to

11

have it expedited, the transcript would not be available until December 14, 2011. Id. at 4.

12

EMI opposes the request, arguing primarily that Smith does not need a copy of the

13

transcript in order to prepare and file his revised opposition. Dckt. No. 102 at 3. EMI also

14

argues that Smith has obtained many continuances in this action and that the “current request is

15

more of the same.” Id. at 5.

16

Although the court obviously cannot determine whether Smith needs to view a copy of

17

the judgment debtor examination transcript before filing his revised opposition, in light of

18

Smith’s representations that he intends to review and cite to it in his revised opposition, Smith’s

19

motion for an extension of time will be granted.

20

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

21

1. Smith’s motion for an extension of time to file a revised opposition to EMI’s motion

22

for assignment of rights, a restraining order, and turnover order, Dckt. No. 100, is granted.

23

2. The hearing on EMI’s motion for assignment of rights, a restraining order, and

24

turnover order, Dckt. No. 79, is continued to February 1, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No.

25

24.

26

////
2

1

3. Smith may file a revised opposition to the motion on or before January 18, 2012.

2

4. EMI may file a reply to Smith’s opposition on or before January 25, 2012.

3

Dated: December 12, 2011.

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