Solarmore Mgt. Services, Inc. v. Bankruptcy Estate of DC Solar Solutions, et al.,

Filing 159

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 09/07/21 EXTENDING the deadline for the Defendant to answer, object, or otherwise respond to Solarmore Management Services, Inc.'s Second Amended Complaint to 10/15/21; Solarmore to file its oppositions by 12/15/21 with Defendant's reply due 01/12/22. All discovery and the Rule 26(f) conference between the Parties are STAYED until 30 days after either (a) the hearing on Defendant's motion to dismiss, or (b) the hearing date is taken off the calendar and the motions are deemed submitted on the papers. (Benson, A.)

Case 2:19-cv-02544-JAM-DB Document 159 Filed 09/07/21 Page 1 of 5

1 Nathan G. Kanute (CA Bar No. 300946)
SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
2 50 West Liberty Street, Suite 510
Reno, Nevada 89501
3 Telephone: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
4
Attorneys for Plaintiff
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

Case No. 2:19-cv-02544-JAM-DB

SOLARMORE MANAGEMENT
9 SERVICES, INC., a California corporation,
10

STIPULATION FOR EXTENDING
TIME FOR DEFENDANT ALVAREZ &
MARSAL VALUATION SERVICES,
LLC TO RESPOND TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER

Plaintiff,

L.L.P.
LAW OFFICES
50 W. Liberty Street, Suite 510
Reno, Nevada 89501
775-785-5440

Snell & Wilmer

11 v.
12 JEFF CARPOFF and PAULETTE
CARPOFF, husband and wife; LAUREN
13 CARPOFF, an individual; ROBERT V.
AMATO, an individual; PRISCILLA
14 AMATO, an individual; ROBERT
KARMANN, an individual; RONALD J.
15 ROACH, an individual; JOSEPH BAYLISS,
an individual; BAYLISS INNOVATIVE
16 SERVICES, INC., a California corporation;
ARI J. LAUER, an individual; LAW
17 OFFICES OF ARI J. LAUER; ALAN
HANSEN; an individual; SEBASTIAN
18 JANO, an individual; RYAN GUIDRY, an
individual; CARRIE CARPOFF-BODEN, an
19 individual; PATRICK MOORE, an
individual; HALO MANAGEMENT
20 SERVICES LLC, a Nevada limited liability
company; ALVAREZ & MARSAL
21 VALUATION SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company; BARRY
22 HACKER, an individual; MARSHALL &
STEVENS, INC., a Delaware corporation;
23 COHNREZNICK CAPITAL MARKETS
SECURITIES, LLC, a Maryland limited
24 liability company; FALLBROOK CAPITAL
SECURITIES CORPORATION, a Florida
25 corporation; SCOTT WENTZ, an individual;
RAINA YEE, an individual; VISTRA
26 INTERNATIONAL EXPANSION (USA)
INC., fka RADIUS GGE (USA), INC., fka
27
28

Complaint Served: Various Dates
Response Deadline: September 13, 2021
New Response Deadline: October 15, 2021

1
STIPULATION FOR EXTENDING TIME FOR
DEFENDANT ALVAREZ & MARSAL VALUATION
SERVICES, LLC TO RESPOND TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER

L.L.P.
law offices
50 West Liberty Street
Suite 510
Reno, Nevada 89501

Snell & Wilmer

Case 2:19-cv-02544-JAM-DB Document 159 Filed 09/07/21 Page 2 of 5

1 HIGH STREET PARTNERS INC., a
Maryland corporation; RADIUS GGE (USA),
2 INC., fka HIGH STREET PARTNERS INC.,
a Maryland corporation; MONTAGE
3 SERVICES, INC., a California corporation;
HERITAGE BANK OF COMMERCE, a
4 California corporation; DIANA KERSHAW,
an individual; CARSON TRAILER, INC., a
5 California corporation; DAVID ENDRES, an
individual; AHERN RENTALS INC., a
6 Nevada corporation, AHERN AD, LLC, a
Nevada limited liability company; THE
7 STRAUSS LAW FIRM, LLC, a South
Carolina limited liability company; PETER
8 STRAUSS, an individual; PANDA BEAR
INTERNATIONAL, LTD., a Hong Kong
9 corporation; PANDA SOLAR SOLUTIONS
LLC, a Nevada limited liability corporation;
10 DC SOLAR INTERNATIONAL, INC., a
Nevis corporation; BAYSHORE SELECT
11 INSURANCE, a Bahamian Corporation;
CHAMPION SELECT INSURANCE, a
12 Bahamian Corporation; JPLM DYNASTY
TRUST, a Cook Island Trust; BILLIE JEAN
13 TRUST, a Cook Island Trust; SOUTHPAC
INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Cook Islands
14 Corporation,
15

Defendants.

16
17

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Solarmore Management

18

Services, Inc. (“Solarmore”) and Defendant Alvarez & Marsal Valuation Services, LLC

19

(“Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”), either for themselves or by and through their

20

respective counsel, that:

21

Solarmore filed its First Amended Complaint in this Court on December 18, 2020.

22

Defendant were personally served or waived service on various dates in January 21, 2021;

23

The Parties previously stipulated to extend the deadlines for the Defendants to file

24

responsive pleadings to Solarmore’s First Amended Complaint until September 13, 2021

25

and had stipulated to extended response and reply deadlines along with modest page limit

26

increases for any motion to dismiss that may be filed (see ECF No. 139);

27
28

2
STIPULATION FOR EXTENDING TIME FOR
ALVAREZ & MARSAL VALUATION SERVICES,
LLC TO RESPOND TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER

Case 2:19-cv-02544-JAM-DB Document 159 Filed 09/07/21 Page 3 of 5

1
2
3
4
5
6

The Court previously approved the stipulations, and Defendant’s responsive
pleadings are currently due September 13, 2021 (see ECF No. 140);
On April 12, 2021, Defendant Heritage Bank of Commerce filed a Motion to Dismiss
the First Amended Complaint (the “Heritage Bank MTD”) (see ECF No. 84);
On June 2, 2021, the Court took the Heritage Bank MTD under submission (see ECF
No. 114);

Solarmore to file an amended complaint on or before August 10, 2021 (see ECF No. 138);

9

On August 10, 2021, Solarmore filed its Second Amended Complaint, which has

10

been provided to Defendants via the Court’s ECF service and/or by copy provided by

11
L.L.P.
law offices
50 West Liberty Street
Suite 510
Reno, Nevada 89501

On July 21, 2021, the Court granted the Heritage Bank MTD, but permitted

8

Snell & Wilmer

7

Solarmore’s counsel;

12
13

The Defendants agree that they have been served or agree that they now waive
service of the Second Amended Complaint, without waiving any other defenses;

14

Defendant has requested additional time to review and respond to the Second

15

Amended Complaint and Solarmore has agreed to extend the deadline for a responsive

16

pleading to the Second Amended Complaint until October 15, 2021;

17

The Parties, therefore, have agreed, and hereby request, that the undersigned

18

Defendant’s deadline to respond to Solarmore’s Second Amended Complaint shall be

19

extended to October 15, 2021 and that Solarmore’s deadline to respond to any motion to

20

dismiss be set at 60 days, as it previously was by this Court;

21

Additionally, given the numerous legal issues and causes of action asserted against

22

Defendant, Solarmore and Defendant have agreed to, and hereby request, a modest

23

modification of the page limits for briefing on Defendant’s motion to dismiss as follows:

24

twenty (20) pages for Defendant’s initial motion; twenty (20) pages for Solarmore’s

25

oppositions, and ten (10) pages for Defendant’s reply; and

26
27
28

3
STIPULATION FOR EXTENDING TIME FOR
ALVAREZ & MARSAL VALUATION SERVICES,
LLC TO RESPOND TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER

Case 2:19-cv-02544-JAM-DB Document 159 Filed 09/07/21 Page 4 of 5

1

Finally, the Parties have agreed that it is in the best interests of the Parties and this

2

Court that all discovery and the Rule 26(f) conference be stayed until 30 days after either

3

(a) the hearing on Defendant’s motion to dismiss, or (b) the hearing date is taken off the

4

Court’s calendar and the motions are deemed submitted on the papers.

5
6

This is the first request for an extension for Defendant to respond to the Second
Amended Complaint.

7

THEREFORE, pursuant to L. R. 143 and 144, the Parties hereby stipulate as follows:

8

1.

9
10

L.L.P.
law offices
50 West Liberty Street
Suite 510
Reno, Nevada 89501

Snell & Wilmer

11

The deadline for the Defendant to answer, object, or otherwise respond to

Solarmore Management Services, Inc.’s Second Amended Complaint shall be October 15,
2021. Defendant’s motion brief shall be limited to twenty (20) pages;
2.

The deadline for Solarmore to file its oppositions to Defendant’s motion to

12

dismiss shall be December 15, 2021. Solarmore’s oppositions shall be limited to twenty

13

(20) pages;

14
15
16

3.

The deadline for Defendant to file a reply shall be January 12, 2022.

Defendant’s reply shall be limited to ten (10) pages; and
4.

All discovery and the Rule 26(f) conference between the Parties shall be

17

stayed until 30 days after either (a) the hearing on Defendant’s motion to dismiss, or (b) the

18

hearing date is taken off the calendar and the motions are deemed submitted on the papers.

19
20

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: September 3, 2021

SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.

21

By: /s/Nathan G. Kanute
Nathan G. Kanute
50 W. Liberty Street, Suite 510
Reno, NV 89501
Attorneys for Plaintiff

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
STIPULATION FOR EXTENDING TIME FOR
ALVAREZ & MARSAL VALUATION SERVICES,
LLC TO RESPOND TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER

Case 2:19-cv-02544-JAM-DB Document 159 Filed 09/07/21 Page 5 of 5

1
2

DATED: September 3, 2021

3

DURIE TANGRI LLP

4

By: /s/Henry Huttinger (with permission)
W. Henry Huttinger
953 East 3rd Street
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Attorneys for Alvarez & Marsal Valuation
Services, LLC

5
6
7
8
9
10

L.L.P.
law offices
50 West Liberty Street
Suite 510
Reno, Nevada 89501

Snell & Wilmer

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14
15

Dated: September 7, 2021

/s/ John A. Mendez
THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5
STIPULATION FOR EXTENDING TIME FOR
ALVAREZ & MARSAL VALUATION SERVICES,
LLC TO RESPOND TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER