Brinskele v. The United States

Filing 36

ORDER Setting SHOW CAUSE Hearing for Garnishee Vir2us, Inc. Hearing set for 4/10/2014 11:00 AM. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 04/03/2014. (dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 EDWARD A. BRINSKELE, 12 13 Plaintiff, No. C-13-MISC-80094 JSW (DMR) ORDER SETTING SHOW CAUSE HEARING v. 14 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 15 Defendant. ___________________________________/ 16 17 On April 30, 2013, the United States registered and filed in this Court a judgment against 18 Plaintiff and Judgment Debtor Edward A. Brinskele that was entered by the United States Court of 19 Federal Claims in September 2009. [Docket No. 1 (Judgment).] On October 24, 2013, the Clerk 20 issued a writ of garnishment to Vir2us, Inc. (“Vir2us”) as Garnishee for the purpose of garnishing 21 property in which Brinskele has a substantial interest to satisfy the judgment. [Docket No. 13 (Writ 22 of Garnishment).] Vir2us’s answer to the writ was due on November 12, 2013. (Yang-Green Decl, 23 Nov. 22, 2013, ¶ 3.) It failed to answer, and the United States moved for an Order to Show Cause 24 directed to Vir2us on November 22, 2013, seeking an order requiring Vir2us to appear before the 25 court to answer the writ. [Docket No. 16.] The court granted the United States’s motion for an 26 Order to Show Cause and set a hearing on January 23, 2014 for Vir2us to appear and show cause 27 why it failed to comply with the writ of garnishment and why the court should not enter judgment 28 against Vir2us in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 3205(b)(6). [Docket No. 19.] 1 The court held a hearing on January 23, 2014. Vir2us failed to appear through counsel. 2 Instead, Brinskele appeared and attempted to challenge service of the writ of garnishment on Vir2us. 3 Given Brinskele’s representations that Vir2us was in the process of retaining counsel in connection 4 with this matter, the court did not hold the order to show cause hearing and instead ordered Vir2us to 5 file a notice of appearance by counsel by January 27, 2014. [Docket No. 22 (Minute Order).] No 6 notice of appearance was filed on behalf of Vir2us by the deadline, and on February 12, 2014, the 7 United States filed a motion for money judgment and order compelling answer against Vir2us on the 8 grounds that Vir2us failed to appear and show good cause why it failed to comply with the writ on 9 January 23, 2014.1 [Docket No. 25.] However, as noted, the court did not hold the order to show cause hearing on that date. Therefore, the court will give Garnishee Vir2us one more 11 opportunity to appear before this court and show cause why it failed to comply with the writ of 12 garnishment and why the court should not enter judgment against Vir2us. On April 10, 2014 13 at 11:00 a.m., at the U.S. District Court, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California 94612 (for 14 courtroom number and floor information, please check the Court’s on-line calendar at 15 http://www.cand.uscourts.gov (click “Calendars - Judges’ Weekly Calendars” link, then select Judge 16 Ryu’s calendar)), Garnishee Vir2us shall appear before this court and 1) show cause, if any, why it 17 failed to comply with the writ of garnishment issued on October 24, 2013 and why the court should 18 not enter judgment against Garnishee Vir2us for the value of Judgment Debtor Edward Brinskele’s 19 nonexempt interest in property that was and is within the Garnishee’s custody, control or possession 20 as of October 28, 2013, and 2) answer the writ of garnishment. RT 25 H DONNA M. RYU ER United States Magistrate Judge N 26 F D IS T IC T O R 27 1 28 u a M. Ry onn Judge D R NIA Dated: April 3, 2014 NO 24 D RDERE FO 23 OO IT IS S LI IT IS SO ORDERED. A 22 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O S 21 UNIT ED For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 C On February 20, 2014, an attorney filed an “Amended Appearance of Counsel” for “Vir2us Inc., in place and stead of Edward A. Brinskele.” [Docket No. 28.] 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?