Twenty-Two Strategic Investment Funds et al v. United States of America

Filing 66

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO ENLARGE TIME FOR BRIEING IN RESPONSE TO INTERVENOR'S MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/28/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/28/2012)

1 DAVID A. HUBBERT
Deputy Assistant Attorney General
2
STUART D. GIBSON (MnSBN 34587)
3 Senior Litigation Counsel
[e-mail]
4 ADAIR F. BOROUGHS (TnSBN 026210)
Trial Attorney
5 [e-mail]
Tax Division, U.S. Department of Justice
6 P.O. Box 403
Washington, DC 20044
7 Tel: [phone] (Mr. Gibson)
[phone] (Ms. Boroughs)
8 Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for United States of America
9
10 MELINDA L. HAAG (CaSBN 132612)
United States Attorney
11 Northern District of California
Of Counsel
12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

16
17
18

TWENTY-TWO STRATEGIC
INVESTMENT FUNDS, LLC; AND
PRESIDIO GROWTH, LLC (Tax
Matters Partner),

19

Petitioners,

20
21
22
23
24

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. C 05-02835-RS

)
)
)

Hearing Date: February 21, 2013
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Place: Courtroom 3, 17th Floor
Hon. Richard Seeborg

)
)
)

STIPULATION TO ENLARGE TIME FOR
BRIEFING IN RESPONSE TO
INTERVENOR’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR,
IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

25
26
27
28

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 6-2, Respondent United States and Intervenor Birch Ventures,
LLC jointly request an enlargement of time to file briefing in response to Intervenor’s recently-filed

1
2

Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 64). In support of
this request, the parties jointly state as follows:

3
1.

On November 21, 2012, Intervenor Birch Ventures, LLC filed a motion to dismiss or,

4
5
6
7
8

in the alternative, a motion for summary judgment in the above-captioned case. (Dkt. No. 64.)
2.

Respondent’s opposition is currently due on December 5, 2012, and Intervenor’s

reply is currently due on December 12, 2012. The hearing is set for February 21, 2013, at 1:30 p.m.
3.

The parties request that Respondent’s time to file its opposition be extended by two

9
weeks, to December 19, 2012, and that Intervenor’s time to file its reply be extended by 13 days, to
10
11

be due January 8, 2013.
Previous Time Modifications

12
13
14
15

4.

This Court previously granted stipulated requests to extend time to file answers in

some of these related cases. Shasta Strategic Investment Fund, LLC v. United States, Case No. 044264 (N.D. Cal.), Dkt. Nos. 13, 18; Belford Strategic Investment Fund, LLC v. United States, Case

16
17

No. 04-4309 (N.D. Cal.), Dkt. Nos. 8, 11; Princeton Strategic Investment Fund, LLC v. United

18

States, Case No. 04-4310 (N.D. Cal.), Dkt. Nos. 11, 15; Sanford Strategic Investment Fund, LLC v.

19

Untied States, Case No. 04-4398 (N.D. Cal.), Dkt. Nos. 9, 12; Olympus Strategic Investment Fund,

20

LLC v. United States, Case No. 04-4399 (N.D. Cal.), Dkt. Nos. 9, 13; Sill Strategic Investment Fund,

21

LLC v. United States, Case No. 04-4964 (N.D. Cal.), Dkt. Nos. 10, 13.

22
23
24
25
26
27

5.

This Court previously granted Petitioners’ Motion to Shorten Time to Hear Motion to

Compel a 30(b)(6) Deposition in these related cases. Shasta, Case No. 04-4264, Dkt. No. 48.
6.

This Court granted Respondent's motion to stay these related cases on November 7,

2005, due to parallel criminal proceedings. Shasta, Case No. 04-4264, Dkt. No. 95. This Court
grated a subsequent motion to stay these related cases on October 2, 2006. Shasta, Case No. 04-

28
-2-

1
2

4264, Dkt. No. 103. This Court lifted the stay on June 9, 2011. Shasta, Case No. 04-4264, Dkt. No.
124.

3
7.

This Court previously granted a stipulated request to enlarge time for briefing in

4
5
6
7
8

response to Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment in Princeton Strategic Investment Fund,
LLC v. United States, Case No. 04-4310 (N.D. Cal.). Princeton, Dkt. No. 37.
8.

The Court previously granted three other stipulated requests to extend deadlines in

these related cases. Shasta, Case No. 04-4264, Dkt. Nos. 130, 133, and 140.

9
9.

After Judge Ware retired and Judge Seeborg held a scheduling conference with the

10
11
12

parties, the Court entered a Case Management Scheduling Order modifying the remaining schedule
in these related cases. Shasta, Case No. 04-4264, Dkt. No. 160.

13

The Requested Extensions Will Not Affect the Hearing Date or the Case Schedule

14

10.

15

The hearing on the motion has been set for February 21, 2013. Dkt. No. 64. Thus,

the requested extensions would have no effect on the date of the hearing, which is more than six

16
17
18
19
20
21

weeks after the final reply brief would be filed under the requested extensions.
11.

By this Court’s order, the last date for hearing dispositive motions is February 21,

2013. Dkt. No. 61. Thus, the requested extensions would not affect the schedule of the case.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AND STIPULATED by the parties, subject to an
order of the Court that:

22
23

(A) the time by which Respondent may file an opposition to Intervenor Birch Ventures,

24

LLC’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 64) is

25

extended to December 19, 2012; and

26
27
28
-3-

1
2

(B) the time by which Intervenor Birch Ventures, LLC may file a reply to Respondent’s
Opposition to Intervenor Birch Ventures, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, Motion for

3
Summary Judgment is extended to January 8, 2013.
4
5
6

Dated: November 28, 2012

Respectfully submitted

7

/s/ Martin A. Schainbaum
MARTIN A. SCHAINBAUM
Martin A. Schainbaum, PLC
Attorney for Intervenor Birch
Ventures, LLC

/s/ Adair F. Boroughs
ADAIR F. BOROUGHS
Trial Attorney
Tax Division, Department of Justice
Attorney for Respondent

8
9
10
11
12

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14
15

Dated: 11/28/12

____________________________
Richard Seeborg
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-