M/A Com Technology Solutions, Inc.-v-Integrated Semiconductor Service, Inc.

Filing 40

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 24 Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion to Modify Temporary Restraining Order. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/2/2015)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

M/A-COM TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS,
INC.,

No. C-15-2423 EMC

9
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S EX
PARTE MOTION TO MODIFY
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

v.
11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

INTEGRATED SEMICONDUCTOR
SERVICE, INC., et al.,

(Docket No. 24)

Defendants.
___________________________________/

14
15
16

Previously, the Court granted in part Plaintiff M/A-COM Technology Solutions, Inc.’s

17

“MACOM”) motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) against Defendants Integrated

18

Semiconductor Service, Inc. (“ISS”) and Steven L. Collins. Currently pending before the Court is

19

MACOM’s ex parte motion to modify the TRO. To date, only Mr. Collins has made an appearance

20

in this lawsuit. Mr. Collins opposes MACOM’s motion.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Having reviewed the papers submitted, the Court hereby finds the matter suitable for
disposition without oral argument. The motion is hereby GRANTED.
I.

FACTUAL & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The TRO currently in force provides as follows:
Defendants Integrated Semiconductor Service, Inc. and Steven L.
Collins (the “Defendants”) and their agents, assigns or anybody acting
on their behalf or in concert with them, are enjoined and restrained
from withdrawing, transferring, or encumbering any funds in any bank
account belonging to Defendants to the extent such action causes there
to be less than $224,823.65 in available funds. All bank accounts
belonging to or controlled by Defendants on which Integrated

1

Semiconductor Service, Inc. and/or Steven L. Collins is a signatory or
otherwise have withdrawal privileges are frozen in the amount of
$224,823.65, and Defendants are prohibited from transferring,
spending, encumbering, or otherwise disposing of the $224,823.65
belonging to MACOM.

2
3
4

Docket No. 19 (Order at 3). The TRO issued on June 5, 2015, and, on the same day, MACOM

5

provided notice of the TRO to both ISS and Mr. Collins, including by e-mail and telephone. See

6

Docket No. 20 (proof of service).

7

Subsequently, MACOM began to obtain discovery as to what happened with the

8

$324,823.65 that it wired to ISS. The discovery obtained from ISS’s bank, Bank of America,

9

reflects as follows.
•

On May 26, 2015 – approximately a week after MACOM wired the money – ISS/Mr. Collins

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

withdrew $305,040 from the bank account holding the funds. See Holland Decl., Exs. 3-4

12

(Bank of America records).

13

•

Also on May 26, 2015, ISS purchased four cashier’s checks – all made payable to ISS – for

14

the following amounts: $50,000; $40,000; $100,000; and $100,000. See Holland Decl., Ex. 4

15

(Bank of America records).

16

•

On June 2, 2015, ISS purchased another cashier’s check, this one in the amount of $100,000

17

and made payable to MACOM. See Holland Decl., Ex. 5 (Bank of America records). This is

18

the $100,000 that was given to MACOM prior to issuance of the TRO. See Ex Parte App. at

19

6.

20

•

On June 6, 2015 – a Saturday and the day after the TRO issued and Defendants were given

21

notice thereof – ISS/Mr. Collins began the process of withdrawing $98,974 from the account

22

where MACOM had wired the money.1 The same day, ISS purchased more cashier’s checks

23

as follows: $50,000 made payable to MACOM; $10,000 made payable to Mr. Collins;

24

$20,000 made payable to Mr. Collins; and $10,000 made payable to Mr. Collins. See

25

Holland Decl., Ex. 6 (Bank of America records).

26
27
28

1

Mr. Collins claims that, although MACOM gave notice of the TRO on June 5, 2015, see
Docket No. 20 (proof of service), including by e-mail and telephone, he did not become “aware of
the lawsuit and the Court’s restraining order” until June 15, 2015. See Collins Decl. ¶ 7.

2

1

On June 19, 2015, MACOM took the deposition of Mr. Collins. During the deposition, Mr.

2

Collins testified, inter alia, that:

3

•

4
5

The last time ISS provided services to MACOM was in 2013 or early 2014. See Holland
Decl., Ex. 1 (Collins Depo. at 81).

•

MACOM owed ISS $185,000 for services provided but ISS never invoiced MACOM for

6

these services. See Holland Decl., Ex. 1 (Collins Depo. at 110). Nor did ISS communicate

7

to MACOM that it was owed the $185,000. See Holland Decl., Ex. 1 (Collins Depo. at 112).

8

•

9

Collins would have to generate those documents. See Holland Decl., Ex. 1 (Collins Depo. at

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11

No documents currently exist which support ISS’s claim for $185,000; ISS and/or Mr.

112).
•

With respect to the cashier’s checks that ISS purchased, at least some have been turned over

12

to a third party, David Dunham, whom Mr. Collins characterizes as his “consultant” or

13

“advisor.”2 See Holland Decl., Ex. 1 (Collins Depo. at 155-56).

14

•

With respect to the money that ISS withdrew, bills were paid, including $15,000-$17,000

15

which was sent – in cash – to a person by the name of “Rocky” in China. See Holland Decl.,

16

Ex. 1 (Collins Depo. at 211-12).

17

Mr. Collins declined to answer whether he had or has been paying his attorney of record for

18

his services. See Holland Decl., Ex. 1 (Collins Depo. at 15).

19

Based on the information obtained from Bank of America and Mr. Collins, MACOM filed

20

the currently pending motion to modify the existing TRO. More specifically, MACOM proposed

21

that the Court order as follows:

22

Defendants Integrated Semiconductor Service, Inc. and Steven
L. Collins, and non- parties David Dunham and Vernon C. Goins, and
their agents, assigns or anybody acting on their behalf or in concert
with them, are ordered to turnover any cashier’s checks in their
possession drawn on Bank of America, the proceeds of such checks, or
any other cash, checks, money orders, or other instrument or proceeds
there from that constitute all or part of the $224,823.65 that is the
subject of this Court’s June 5, 2015 order, into the custody of the clerk
of this Court at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94012.

23
24
25
26
27
28

2

Notice of the pending motion was given to Mr. Dunham. The Court did not receive any
opposition from Mr. Dunham.

3

1

Each party that receives notice of this order must comply immediately
with its terms, and no later than 48 hours after receiving notice.

2
Upon email delivery of this order to Collins’ attorney, Vernon
C. Goins, Collins must recover all the cashier’s checks drawn on Bank
of America, the proceeds of such checks, or any other cash, checks,
money orders, or other instrument or proceeds there from that
constitutes all or part of the $224,823.65 that is the subject of this
Court’s June 5, 2015 order, from Dunham or any other individual or
entity that has possession of those instruments or cash. Collins must
then deliver such instruments or cash to the clerk of this Court
immediately, but no later than 48 hours after the time this order is sent
to Collins’ attorney, Vernon C. Goins, via electronic mail.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Docket No. 24-1 (proposed order).
Subsequently, Mr. Collins filed an opposition to the motion to modify, largely arguing that
the motion was moot because he had since obtained possession of all of the June 2015 cashier’s

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

checks, as well as the $40,000 cashier’s check from May 2015,3 and turned over these checks to

12

MACOM. See Collins Decl. ¶ 2; Holland Reply Decl., Ex. 2 (cashier’s checks turned over to

13

MACOM). According to Mr. Collins, as a result of this $130,000 delivery to MACOM, he has “no

14

more cash, checks, money orders, or other instruments or proceeds belonging to Plaintiff.” Collins

15

Decl. ¶ 3. Mr. Collins also asserts that he has not paid Mr. Goins or his law firm “for [his] defense

16

in this action.” Collins Decl. ¶ 9.

17

In reply, MACOM argues that, even with the turn over of the cashier’s checks, there is still

18

$93,723.02 (out of the total $324,823.65) unaccounted for.4 MACOM says that it cannot determine

19

where the remaining money is located despite its best efforts, see, e.g., Holland Reply Decl., Ex. 1

20

(Collins Depo. at 146) (testifying that, after the money was wired, he withdrew $80,000 in cash to

21

pay bills, including but not limited to the $17,000 sent to Rocky in China), and thus still asks the

22

Court to grant its motion to modify, but just for a lesser sum. MACOM contends: “If defendants

23

Collins and ISS and associated third parties do not possess any of the $93,723.02, there should be no

24

concern with the order.” Reply at 2.

25
26
27
28

3

Mr. Collins claims to have turned over the $50,000 cashier’s check from May 2015, but
this appears to be an error. MACOM has provided evidence showing that the May 2015 cashier’s
check that was turned over was the $40,000 one. See Holland Reply Decl., Ex. 2 (cashier’s checks
turned over).
4

As a result of the TRO, ISS’s bank account has been frozen but there is only $1,100.63 in
that account. See Holland Decl., Ex. 2 (Bank of America records).

4

1

II.

2

DISCUSSION

“[S]ound judicial discretion may call for the modification of the terms of an injunctive decree

3

if the circumstances, whether of law or fact, obtain[ed] at the time of its issuance have changed, or

4

new ones have since arisen.” Sys. Fed.’n No. 91, Ry. Emps.’ Dep’t v. Wright, 364 U.S. 642, 647

5

(1961).

6

The Court agrees with MACOM that there has been a change in circumstances or that new

7

circumstances have arisen since the issuance of the TRO. More specifically, since the issuance of

8

the TRO, MACOM has obtained discovery which has shed light on what happened to the funds it

9

wired to ISS. The discovery reflects, inter alia, that ISS has close to no funds left in its bank
account where the money was wired and that Mr. Collins has taken steps to secrete a significant

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

amount of that money and/or to spend it. Moreover, Mr. Collins’s credibility has been put into

12

question as a result of statements that he has made as a part of these proceedings. For example,

13

Collins contends that he had no knowledge of the lawsuit or the TRO until June 15, 2015, but he

14

provides no explanation as to why he did not see the e-mail or hear the voicemail sent by MACOM

15

on June 5, 2015, regarding the issuance of the TRO. Moreover, before issuance of the TRO, the

16

Court was in contact with Mr. Collins’s now-counsel of record, and counsel indicated to the Court

17

that he would inform Mr. Collins of the then-pending motion for a TRO.

18

Mr. Collins’s credibility is questionable for additional reasons. For instance, Mr. Collins

19

claimed in his deposition that he sent $17,000 in cash to a person in China. This claim, for obvious

20

reasons, strains credulity. Mr. Collins also testified in his declaration that he has “no more cash,

21

checks, money orders, or other instruments or proceeds belonging to Plaintiff,” Collins Decl. ¶ 3, but

22

notably this does not foreclose the possibility that there is another person (aside from Mr. Dunham)

23

to whom Mr. Collins gave cash, checks, or other proceeds for safekeeping or ultimate return.

24

Given the above circumstances, the Court deems it appropriate to modify the TRO such that

25

not only are funds frozen (per the original TRO) but that they must actually be turned over to the

26

Court to ensure that there is no improper dissipation. The Court also agrees with MACOM’s point

27

that, “[i]f defendants Collins and ISS and associated third parties do not possess any of the

28

$93,723.02, there should be no concern with the [modified] order.” Reply at 2. Finally, the Court

5

1

notes that both the original and the expanded TRO are properly asserted against ISS as it has been

2

given notice of all proceedings related thereto and has failed to make an appearance.5

3

Accordingly, the Court hereby orders as follows:

4

Defendants Integrated Semiconductor Service, Inc. and Steven L. Collins, and non-parties

5

David Dunham and Vernon C. Goins, and their agents or anybody acting on their behalf or in

6

concert with them, are ordered to turnover any cashier’s checks in their possession, custody, or

7

control drawn on Bank of America, the proceeds of such checks, or any other cash, checks, money

8

orders, or other instrument or proceeds there from that constitute all or part of the $224,823.65 that

9

is the subject of this Court’s June 5, 2015 order, into the custody of the clerk of this Court at 450
Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94012. Each party that receives notice of this order must

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

comply immediately with its terms, and no later than 48 hours after receiving notice.

12

This order disposes of Docket No. 24.

13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

Dated: July 2, 2015

17

_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

5

And at this point, there is little doubt that ISS has knowledge because Mr. Collins is its
managing agent. See generally Docket No. 31 (Collins declaration).

6