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).
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?