BGC Partners, Inc. et al v. Avison Young (Canada), Inc. et al

Filing 64

ORDER re 46 Motion for Enlargement of Time, or Alternatively, for Clarification of 3/31/2016 Ruling. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 8/8/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

PISANELLI BICE
400 SOUTH 7TH STREET, SUITE 300
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89101

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Todd L. Bice, Esq., Bar No. 4534
[e-mail]
Dustun H. Holmes, Esq., Bar No. 12776
[e-mail]
PISANELLI BICE PLLC
400 South 7th Street, Suite 300
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone:
702.214.2100
Facsimile:
702.214.2101
and
Francis X. Riley, III, Bar No. 330611994
(Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
Ruth A. Rauls, Bar No. 12892005
(Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
SAUL EWING, LLP
650 College Road East, Suite 400
Princeton, NJ 08540
Telephone: [phone]
Robert C. Gill, II, Bar No. 26226
(Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
SAUL EWING LLP
1919 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 550
Washington, D.C. 20007
Telephone:
202.296-6600
Counsel for Plaintiffs BGC Partners, Inc.;
G&E Acquisition Company, LLC; and
BGC Real Estate Of Nevada, LLC.

18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

19

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

20
21
22

BGC PARTNERS, INC., et al.,

Case No.

Plaintiffs,

2:15-cv-00531-RFB-GWF

MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF
TIME, OR ALTERNATIVELY,
FOR CLARIFICATION OF
MARCH 31, 2016 RULING

vs.
AVISON YOUNG (CANADA) INC., et al.,

23
Defendants.

24
25
26

Plaintiffs (collectively "BGC") hereby move this Court for an enlargement of time, or

27

alternatively, for a clarification of its March 31, 2016 ruling as reflected in a minute order of even

28

date. Plaintiffs state as follows in support of this motion.

1

1

Plaintiffs commenced this action in the Eighth Judicial District of Nevada on February 27,

2

2015. Defendants filed a notice of removal to this Court, claiming that this action arises under or

3

is “related to” a pending bankruptcy proceeding, relying on jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Section

4

1334(a) and (b), and Section 1452(a).

5

Plaintiffs then moved to remand this action to state court. Plaintiffs’ supporting papers,

6

and Defendants' opposition papers, are on file. Because Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand was fully

7

briefed and ripe for decision, this Court scheduled argument for, and entertained argument on,

8

March 29, 2016. At the conclusion of the hearing the Court took the matter under advisement.

9
10

PISANELLI BICE
400 SOUTH 7TH STREET, SUITE 300
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89101

11

On March 31, 2016, this Court entered a minute order stating as follows:
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion [11] to Remand is DENIED without prejudice. A written order shall
issue. The parties shall submit a proposed discovery schedule by April 15, 2016.

12

This Court has not yet entered a written order setting forth the basis for its ruling as it

13

indicated that it would in its March 31, 2016 minute order, and, accordingly, has not yet explained

14

the basis for its determination that the parties should engage in discovery on issues related to the

15

Motion to Remand, and has not specified what the scope of any discovery should be. The parties

16

previously stipulated that they would defer their Rule 26(f) conference until sixty (60) days after

17

this Court resolves the Motion to Remand. (Docket 14). Consequently, the parties anticipated

18

that they would not proceed with discovery at all until after this Court resolved the Motion to

19

Remand.

20

...

21

...

22
23

...

24
25
26
27
28

2

1

Plaintiffs ask that this Court modify its ruling as reflected in its minute order dated March

2

31, 2016, and not require that the parties submit a discovery schedule by April 15, 2016. In

3

accordance with the parties’ previously filed stipulation, Plaintiffs request that the parties not be

4

required to proceed generally with discovery until 60 days after this Court’s written order setting

5

forth its ruling on the Motion to Remand. To the extent that the Court wishes the parties to

6

engage in limited discovery related only to the Motion to Remand, Plaintiffs request that this

7

Court clarify what the scope of that discovery should be to assist them in working out a discovery

8

schedule.

9

DATED this 14th day of April, 2016

10

PISANELLI BICE
400 SOUTH 7TH STREET, SUITE 300
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89101

11

PISANELLI BICE PLLC

12

By:

/s/ Todd L. Bice
Todd L. Bice, Esq., Bar No. 4534
Dustun H. Holmes, Esq., Bar No. 12776
Pisanelli Bice PLLC
400 South 7th Street, Suite 300
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
and
Francis X. Riley, III, Bar No. 330611994
(Pro Hac pending)
[e-mail]
Ruth A. Rauls, Bar No. 12892005
(Pro Hac pending)
[e-mail]
SAUL EWING, LLP
650 College Road East, Suite 400
Princeton, NJ 08540
Robert C. Gill, II, Bar No. 26226
(Pro Hac Vice)
[e-mail]
SAUL EWING LLP
1919 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 550
Washington, D.C. 20007

13
14
15
16
17

IT IS SO ORDERED

18

DATED: August 8, 2016

19
20
21

_______________________________
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24

Counsel for Plaintiff BGC Partners, Inc.;
G&E Acquisition Company, LLC; and BGC
Real Estate Of Nevada, LLC.

25
26
27
28
3

1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

2

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am an employee of Pisanelli Bice, PLLC, and that on this

3

14th day of April, 2016, I caused to be served the foregoing MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT

4

OF TIME, OR ALTERNATIVELY, FOR CLARIFICATION OF MARCH 31, 2016

5

RULING via electronic mail through the United States District Court’s CM/ECF system.

6
7
8

/s/ Shannon Thomas
An employee of Pisanelli Bice, PLLC

9
10

PISANELLI BICE
400 SOUTH 7TH STREET, SUITE 300
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89101

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

4