United States Small Business Administration v. Rocket Ventures II, L.P. et al

Filing 60

ORDER GRANTING AS MODIFIED 59 STIPULATION to Extend Briefing Schedule on Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 4/17/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/17/2012)

Case3:10-cv-04425-JSW Document59 Filed04/17/12 Page1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

COOLEY LLP
GORDON C. ATKINSON (122401)
([e-mail])
ABIGAIL E. PRINGLE (272548)
([e-mail])
101 California Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-5800
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
ROCKET VENTURES II, L.P.; ROCKET VENTURES II CEO
FUND, L.P.; and ROCKET VENTURES SBIC PARTNERS,
LLC

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

12
13

UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION in its capacity as Receiver
for ROCKET VENTURES II SBIC, L.P.,

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Plaintiff,
v.
ROCKET VENTURES II, L.P., a California
limited partnership; ROCKET VENTURES II
CEO FUND, L.P., a California limited
partnership; and ROCKET VENTURES SBIC
PARTNERS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company; Cordusio Societa Fiduciaria Per
Azioni Lozia Federico; Kenneth W. & Melissa
Baldwin; Paul Cantwell; Peter Ayrton Cheese;
Yves Derville; Richard S. Cuccioli; Alistair
Anderson Donald; Philippe Gire; Jean-Claude
Guez; Joseph Hawes & Christopher Eyden; Alan
John Healey; Craig Foster Heimark; David E.
Kropp; Gregory Charles Meekings; Michele
Liberato; Fred Cucchi; ValorLife; Alberto
Gandini; Rijete Pty. Ltd.; Christopher Stainton;
Tyna Development; Thomas Tynan; Patrice
Vinet; Hahei Limited; Michael Saunier; Michel
Roujansky; Nigel Backwith; Justine Lumb;
Andrew Middleton; Ajmair Singh Bhullar;
Estate of Grant A. Dove; Luca Casiraghi; David
Mather,

27

Case No. CV-10-4425 JSW
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER BETWEEN PLAINTIFF
RECEIVER AND DEFENDANTS ROCKET
VENTURES II, L.P., ROCKET
VENTURES II CEO FUND, L.P., AND
ROCKET VENTURES SBIC PARTNERS,
LLC TO EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE
ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT

Defendants.

28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1264914/SF

1.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SUJ MOTION
(CASE NO. CV-10-4425-JSW)

Case3:10-cv-04425-JSW Document59 Filed04/17/12 Page2 of 3

1

Defendants Rocket Ventures II, L.P., Rocket Ventures II CEO Fund, L.P., and Rocket

2

Ventures SBIC Partners, LLC (“Defendants”) and Plaintiff United States Business Administration

3

in its capacity as Receiver for Rocket Ventures II SBIC, L.P. (“Plaintiff Receiver”), by and

4

through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

5

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Receiver filed a motion for summary judgment on April 3, 2012;

6

WHEREAS, Defendants’ opposition to the motion for summary judgment is presently due

7
8
9
10
11
12
13

on April 17, 2012;
WHEREAS, Plaintiff Receiver’s reply in support of its motion for summary judgment is
presently due on April 24, 2012;
WHEREAS, the hearing on the motion for summary judgment is presently scheduled for
June 15, 2012;
WHEREAS, Defendants currently lack facts that Defendants believe may be essential to
support their opposition to Plaintiff Receiver’s motion for summary judgment;

14

WHEREAS, Defendants had scheduled three depositions, but agreed with Plaintiff

15

Receiver to delay those depositions after Plaintiff Receiver’s Amended Complaint added 33 new

16

defendants in January, and Defendants have not rescheduled these depositions as several of the

17

new defendants are still being located and/or responding to the complaint;

18

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that is it in the interest of both judicial economy and

19

efficiency for all parties to permit additional time for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff

20

Receiver’s motion so that they may proceed with their depositions in advance of their response;

21

FOR THE REASONS set forth above:

22

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND ORDERED THAT:

23

1.

24
25
26
27

Defendants’ opposition to Plaintiff Receiver’s motion for summary judgment is

extended to and including May 18, 2012;
2.

Plaintiff Receiver’s reply in support of its motion for summary judgment is
May 29
extended to and including June 1, 2012; and
3.

The hearing on the motion for summary judgment will remain the same.

28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1264914/SF

2.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SUJ MOTION
(CASE NO. CV-10-4425-JSW)

Case3:10-cv-04425-JSW Document59 Filed04/17/12 Page3 of 3

1

SO STIPULATED.

2
3

Dated: April 17, 2012

COOLEY LLP

4
5

By: /s/ Gordon C. Atkinson
Gordon C. Atkinson

6

Attorneys for Defendants
ROCKET VENTURES II, L.P., ROCKET
VENTURES II CEO FUND, L.P. and ROCKET
VENTURES SBIC PARTNERS, LLC

7
8
9

Dated: April 17, 2011

10

SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS
LLP

11
By: /s/ T. Scott Tate
T. Scott Tate

12
13

Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION in its capacity as Receiver
for ROCKET VENTURES II SBIC, L.P.

14
15
16
17

Filer’s Attestation re signatures: Gordon C. Atkinson hereby attests that concurrence in the filing
of this document has been obtained.
ORDER

18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED: AS MODIFIED ABOVE.

20
21

Dated: April 17 2012
___,
Honorable Jeffrey S. White
United States District Court Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COOLEY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1264914/SF

3.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO
EXTEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON SUJ MOTION
(CASE NO. CV-10-4425-JSW)