Tucker v. Regent Asset Management Solutions, et al

Filing 41

INTERIM ORDER RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION. Signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 1/17/12. (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/17/2012)

1

** E-filed January 17, 2012 **

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

For the Northern District of California

NOT FOR CITATION

8

United States District Court

7

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

REBECCA TUCKER,
Plaintiff,

12
v.
13
14

REGENT ASSET MANAGEMENT
SOLUTIONS, INC.; and MICHAEL
SCATA,

No. C11-02335 HRL
INTERIM ORDER RE:
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL
JURISDICTION

15
16
17

Defendants.
____________________________________/
On January 17, 2012, counsel for the plaintiff and defendant Michael Scata appeared via

18

telephone for a hearing on Scata’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. When

19

considering a motion challenging personal jurisdiction, the court has broad discretion to permit

20

discovery “where pertinent facts bearing on the question of jurisdiction are controverted or where a

21

more satisfactory showing of the facts is necessary.” Data Disc, Inc. v. Systems Technology

22

Associates, Inc., 557 F.2d 1280, 1285, n. 1 (9th Cir. 1977). In this case, facts pertinent to

23

jurisdiction do appear to be controverted. Accordingly, the undersigned grants the plaintiff the

24

opportunity to conduct jurisdictional discovery to determine whether this court may exercise

25

personal jurisdiction over defendant Scata. Plaintiff Tucker may depose Scata and request that Scata

26

produce information and documentation relevant to this issue, and may submit her own declaration

27

attesting to jurisdictional facts. Tucker shall submit whatever additional information she wishes to

28

present to the court no later than March 16, 2012. In addition, Scata may submit any additional

1

evidence that is both relevant to the jurisdictional issue and properly authenticated to the court no

2

later than February 17, 2012.

3
4
5
6
7

The matter is taken under submission and the court will issue a ruling. Should a further
hearing be necessary, the court will schedule one.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 17, 2012
HOWARD R. LLOYD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

1

C11-02335 HRL Notice will be electronically mailed to:

2

Todd Friedman
Darin Shaw

[e-mail]
[e-mail]

3
Notice will be sent by mail to:
4
5

Michael Scata
7131 Four Rivers Rd.
Boulder, CO 80301

6
7

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not
registered for e-filing under the court’s CM/ECF program.

8
9

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3