Securities and Exchange Commission v. Small Business Capital Corp. et al

Filing 467

ORDER RE ADMINISTRATIVE AND EX PARTE MOTIONS re #405 MOTION request copies of all information on the receivership properties in San Leandro, CA and Holt CA filed by Mark Feathers, #464 MOTION for Protective Order filed by Mark Feathers, #414 MOTION for an order filed by Mark Feathers, #450 MOTION for Protective Order filed by Mark Feathers. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on May 20, 2013. (psglc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/20/2013) (Additional attachment(s) added on 5/21/2013: #1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE) (ofr, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISION, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) SMALL BUSINESS CAPITAL CORP., MARK ) FEATHERS, INVESTORS PRIME FUND, ) LLC, AND SBC PORTFOLIO FUND, LLC ) ) Defendants. ) Case No.: 12-cv-3237-EJD (PSG) ORDER RE: ADMINISTRATIVE AND EX PARTE MOTIONS (Re: Docket Nos. 405, 414, 450, 464) Defendant Mark Feathers (“Feathers”) has filed several administrative motions seeking 17 18 discovery from Plaintiff Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) or seeking protective orders to 19 prevent discovery by the SEC. Feathers purports to seek relief pursuant to Civ. L.R. 7-11, which 20 provides that a party may seek an order from the court “with respect to miscellaneous 21 administrative matters, not otherwise governed by a federal statute, Federal or local rule or 22 standing order of the assigned judge.” Such motions may include “matters such as motions to 23 24 25 exceed otherwise applicable page limitations or motions to file documents under seal, for example.” 1 Feathers’ requests do not fall into this narrow category of administrative motions. He seeks 26 27 production of documents from the Receiver regarding financial information about the corporate 28 1 Civ. L.R. 7-11. 1 Case No.: 12-3237 EJD (PSG) ORDER 1 defendants in this case, 2 protective orders to prevent the deposition of his spouse, 3 and a protective 2 order to force the SEC to file certain documents under seal. 4 Each of these requests is governed by 3 either the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or a Civil Local Rule, and so filing them as 4 administrative motions is improper. 5 Feathers is a pro se defendant, and so the court will interpret his requests with a certain 6 degree of indulgence. The court will hear arguments on the improperly noticed motions 5 at the 7 8 9 hearing set for Feathers’ properly noticed motion on June 11, 2013. 6 But given Judge Davila’s previous order cautioning Feathers not to file substantive motions as administrative motions 7 and United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 given that Feathers has shown he knows how to file a motion properly, 8 the court will not extend 11 such leniency again in the future. Feathers shall not file any more substantive motions as 12 administrative motions. Administrative motions are for limited miscellaneous issues that require 13 14 neither extensive briefing nor a hearing on the underlying merits. In contrast, substantive conflicts between the parties regarding the scope of discovery often require both. 15 From this point on, when seeking the court’s aid in resolving discovery disputes, both 16 17 parties shall comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Civil Local Rules, and the 18 undersigned’s standing order regarding the filing of substantive motions. In other words, discovery 19 disputes shall be noticed as motions on the docket, with a hearing date reserved, as prescribed in 20 Civ. L.R. 7-2. 21 22 2 See Docket Nos. 405, 414. 23 3 See Docket No. 450. 24 4 See Docket No. 464. 25 5 Specifically, Docket Nos. 405, 414, 450, 464. 26 6 See Docket No. 446. 27 7 See Docket No. 363. 28 8 See Docket No. 446. 2 Case No.: 12-3237 EJD (PSG) ORDER 1 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 20, 2013 3 _________________________________ PAUL S. GREWAL United States Magistrate Judge 4 5 6 7 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Case No.: 12-3237 EJD (PSG) ORDER

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?