Connectu, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc. et al

Filing 72

MOTION for Extension of Time to August 29, 2007 to Respond to First Amended Complaint by Dustin Moskovitz, Andrew McCollum, Thefacebook LLC, Facebook, Inc., Mark Zuckerberg. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Sutton, Theresa)

Download PDF
Connectu, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc. et al Doc. 72 Case 1:07-cv-10593-DPW Document 72 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CONNECTU, INC., CAMERON WINKLEVOSS, TYLER WINKLEVOSS, AND DIVYA NARENDRA, Plaint iff, v. FACEBOOK, INC., MARK ZUCKERBERG, EDUARDO SAVERIN, DUSTIN MOSKOVITZ, ANDREW MCCOLLUM, and FACEBOOK, LLC, Defendants. Civil Action No. 1:07-CV-10593-DPW MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b), Defendants respectfully request that the Court provide a one-week extension of time for them to answer Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint. Docket No. 71. On August 9, 2007, -- a day after the amended complaint was to be filed -- Defendants received Plaintiffs' 100-page, 337-paragraph First Amended Complaint, with 93 exhibits comprising 900 pages of material. Compare ConnectU's 19-page, 104-paragraph original complaint, with six exhibits comprising 21 pages of material. Docket No. 1. This amended complaint appears to contain extensive argument and allegations irrelevant to this case. Rather than simplify and focus the case, Plaintiffs have added new parties and new causes of action. The First Amended Complaint adds three Plaintiffs who were not named in any of the prior three versions of ConnectU's complaint. Plaint iffs have added Promissory Estoppel and Breach of Express Contract causes of action, neither of which was alleged in any of the three prior versions of the complaint. Plaintiffs also have added new theories of successor liability and -1Motion to Enlarge Time to Respond to First Amended Complaint OHS West:260284098.1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:07-cv-10593-DPW Document 72 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 2 of 4 assert all claims against the Facebook entities, which none of the three prior versions offered. Anticipating the defendants' revised motions to dismiss, the Court set a briefing schedule calling for the Defendants to file their motion(s) to dismiss on August 22, 2007. See Clerk's Notes dated July 26, 2007 at 10:07 A.M. Certainly when setting that schedule, no one expected the new complaint to be 100 pages long with 900 pages of exhibits. Parsing the relevant factual allegations for each claim, to the extent any exist, will take some time. Indeed, it appears that plaintiff's strategy is to dump as many claims with as many theories as possible into a complaint with extensive irrelevant factual allegations in order to make a motion to dismiss in the time frames presented more challenging. Given the scope of the revised complaint and the number of exhibits, Defendants request that the Court provide them one addit io nal week to respond. Defendants will need at least this amount of time to parse through the new allegations, argument and exhibits contained in the complaint. Because there is no hearing scheduled, this one week extension will not affect any calendared events. All other deadlines associated with the other briefs can either be unchanged or enlarged by one week. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7.1(A)(2) AND F.R.C.P. 37(A)(2)(B) Counsel for the Facebook Defendants certifies that pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(2) and F.R.C.P. 37(a)(2)(B) they met and conferred with counsel for ConnectU regarding this motion. On August 10, 2007, Theresa Sutton (on behalf of The Facebook Defendants) sought a stipulation from John F. Hornick, Margaret Esquenet and Meredith Schoenfeld (on behalf of Plaintiffs) to extend the time for Defendants to file their motion(s) to dismiss. Plaintiffs would not agree to any extensio n of time . -2Motion to Enlarge Time to Respond to First Amended Complaint OHS West:260284098.1 Case 1:07-cv-10593-DPW Document 72 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 3 of 4 Dated: August 10, 2007 Respect fully submitted, /s/ Theresa A. Sutton /s/ G. Hopkins Guy, III* I. Neel Chatterjee* Monte Cooper* Theresa A. Sutton* ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP 1000 Marsh Road Menlo Park, California 94025 Telephone: (650) 614-7400 Facsimile: (650) 614-7401 hopguy@orrick.co m nchatterjee@orrick.com mcooper@orrick.co m tsutton@orrick.com Steven M. Bauer Jeremy P. Oczek PROSKAUER ROSE, LLP One International Plaza, 14th Floor Boston, MA 02110-2600 Telephone: (617) 526-9600 Facsimile: (617) 526-9899 sbauer@proskauer.com joczek@proskauer.com * Admitted Pro Hac Vice -3Motion to Enlarge Time to Respond to First Amended Complaint OHS West:260284098.1 Case 1:07-cv-10593-DPW Document 72 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 4 of 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that this document(s) filed through the ECF system will be sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non registered participants on _____ __, 2007. Dated: _______ __, 2007. Respect fully submitted, /s/ Name Here /s/ Name of Attorney -4Motion to Enlarge Time to Respond to First Amended Complaint OHS West:260284098.1

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?