Federal Trade Commission v. Swish Marketing, Inc et al

Filing 22

ORDER RE: #19 MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME. Signed by Magistrate Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/10/09. (rslc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/10/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

*E-Filed 11/10/09*

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, v. Plaintiffs, No. C 09-03814 RS ORDER RE MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

SWISH MARKETING, INC., et al, Defendants. ____________________________________/

Defendants have filed a motion under Civil Local Rule 6-3 requesting that they be given an open extension of time to respond to the complaint herein that would not expire until 21 days after the District Court for the District of Columbia has ruled on the Federal Trade Commission's motion to dismiss in a declaratory relief action brought in that forum by several of the defendants ("the DC action"). The DC action was filed some time after the FTC had threatened to bring this suit, but before it was filed. Defendants assert that if the FTC's motion to dismiss the DC action is not granted, they will bring a motion to stay this action, pending final disposition of the DC action. The present motion under Rule 6-3, however, effectively is also a motion to stay this action, although only until after a ruling on the motion to dismiss.1 Defendants do not expressly request relief from the Case Management Scheduling order, but the FTC's opposition assumes that those activities would also be postponed. 1
1

NO. C 0903814 RS ORDER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The issues presented in the present motion, and by the FTC's opposition, are not well-suited for disposition on an expedited basis under the ordinary procedures of Rule 6-3. Accordingly, the matter will be set on the Court's law and motion calendar for December 16, 2009, at 10:30 a.m. No later than November 18, 2009, defendants may file any additional briefing they may wish to submit in support of the motion. No later than December 4, 2009, the FTC may file any additional opposition. Pending resolution of this motion, the parties are relieved from their obligations to make initial disclosures and to confer on a discovery plan, however they should comply with their obligations regarding the ADR process.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 11/10/09 RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

NO. C 0903814 RS ORDER