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

Filing 206

ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING RE PENDING DEFAULT JUDGMENT MOTIONS to be filed by January 16, 2015. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on December 30, 2014. (jcslc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/30/2014)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

UNITED STATES SMALL BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 10-cv-04425-JSW (JCS)
ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL BRIEFING
RE MOTIONS FOR DEFAULT
JUDGMENT

v.
ALISTAIR ANDERSON DONALD, et al.,

Re: Docket Nos. 187-189, 191-197

Defendants.

12
13
At the December 5, 2014 hearing on Plaintiff’s pending default judgment motions, the
14
Court requested additional briefing addressing the question of whether the amounts of the
15
judgments sought against the Class B limited partners should be adjusted in light of the judgment
16
that has already been entered against the Class A partners. In particular, the Court expressed
17
concern that awarding the same unfunded capital contributions against both the Class A partners
18
and the Class B partners might amount to a double recovery to the extent that the Partnership
19
Agreement required the Class B partners to make capital contributions only where the Class A
20
partners had defaulted on their obligations under the agreement. In response, the Receiver cites its
21
authority to demand directly from the Class B partners unfunded amounts, “independently of any
22
of the Class A partners.” However, Plaintiff has not cited specific provisions of the Partnership
23
Agreement, or any legal authority, that address whether judgment may be entered against the Class
24
B partners for amounts that have already been awarded against the Class A partners in a separate
25
judgment. Further, Plaintiff’s brief suggests that close to $6 million of the unfunded capital
26
contribution has, in fact, been paid to Plaintiff already. Plaintiff specifically references a
27
settlement payment of $1,531,199.51 (the source of this payment is not specified) and amounts
28

1

col
llected from other Class B partners in the amoun of $4,276,
nt
,906. These payments al raise the
lso

2

pos
ssibility of double recov
d
very.

3

In light of these con
t
ncerns, the Court reques ts that Plain provide: 1) a sworn declaration
C
ntiff

4

ref
flecting the specific amou of any payments of the unfunde capital co
s
unts
p
f
ed
ontributions t have
that

5

alre
eady been made or are expected to be made in th future; an 2) a suppl
m
e
b
he
nd
lemental brie
ef

6

add
dressing the issues discu
ussed above; specifically Plaintiff sh address w the judg
y,
hall
why
gments

7

sou
ught against the defaultin Class B partners do n amount to a double re
ng
p
not
o
ecovery in li
ight of a) the
e

8

jud
dgment alrea entered against the Class A partn
ady
a
C
ners; and b) t paymen of unfund capital
the
nts
ded

9

tha have alread been mad by other defendants. Plaintiff sha cite to the relevant provisions of
at
dy
de
d
all
e

10

the Partnership Agreement and applica case law in support of its positio
e
p
t
able
w
on.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Plaintif supplemental materia shall be f
ff’s
als
filed no later than Frida January 16, 2015.
r
ay,

12

IT IS SO ORDER
S
RED.

13
14

Da
ated: Decemb 30, 2014
ber
4

15
16
17

___
__________
___________
__________
________
JO
OSEPH C. SP
PERO
Un
nited States M
Magistrate Ju
udge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2