Mitchell v. Cohen et al

Filing 15

ORDER Granting 14 Motion to Extend Time. Overstock.com, Inc. answer due 9/11/2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 8/29/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AMMi)

Todd L. Bice, Bar No. 4534
1 [e-mail]
Emily A. Buchwald, Bar No. 13342
2 [e-mail]
PISANELLI BICE PLLC
3 400 South 7th Street, Suite 300
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
4 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 702.214.2101
5
Eric R. Swibel (pro hac vice forthcoming)
6 LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
330 North Wabash Avenue, Ste. 2800
7 Chicago, Illinois 60611
Telephone: [phone]
8 [e-mail]
9 Attorneys for Defendant Overstock.com, Inc.
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

12 Anthony Mitchell
13
14

CASE NO. 2:24-cv-01042-RFB-DJA
Plaintiff,

v.

15 Ryan Cohen, an individual; Robinhood
Financial LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability
16 Company; Robinhood Securities, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company;
17 Robinhood Money, LLC, a Delaware Limited
Liability Company; The Depository Trust &
18 Clearing Corporation, a New York
Corporation; 20230930-DK-Butterfly-1, Inc., a
19 New York Corporation doing business as Bed
Bath & Beyond; Overstock.com, Inc., a
20 Delaware Corporation doing business as Bed
Bath & Beyond; RC Ventures LLC, a
21 Delaware Limited Liability Company; Sue E.
Gove, an individual,
22
Defendants.
23

ORDER RE:
MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE DEFENDANT’S
RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT
(FIRST REQUEST)

24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 2:23-cv-GMN-DJA.
MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FIRE DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT
US-DOCS\153600699.1

Case 2:24-cv-01042-RFB-DJA Document 14 Filed 08/28/24 Page 2 of 4

Defendant Overstock.com, Inc.1 (“Overstock”), by and through its counsel, hereby moves

1

2 the Court pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) and Local Rule IA 6-1 for a 14-day
3 extension of time for Overstock to respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint. This is the first motion for an
4 extension of time to respond.
5

1.

On June 26, 2024, Plaintiff, who is representing himself pro se, filed a Complaint

6 against Overstock and eight other defendants, alleging he was harmed when he purchased
7 Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. (“BBBY”) shares before BBBY filed for bankruptcy. (See Dkt. 7).
8

2.

On August 7, 2024, Plaintiff attempted to serve Overstock by having the Complaint

9 and a summons delivered to a Latham & Watkins LLP office (Dkt. 12). The Proof of Service says
10 Plaintiff served the summons to a Latham & Watkins associate, but the process server’s description
11 of the associate does not match his physical appearance. (Id.).
12

3.

Overstock is evaluating its defenses and preparing an appropriate response to the

13 Complaint. Overstock anticipates filing a motion to dismiss on several grounds, including:
14

a.

insufficient service of process for failing to serve an agent of Overstock;

15

b.

improper venue because the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of

16

New Jersey retains exclusive jurisdiction over Overstock’s purchase of

17

intellectual property from BBBY. See In re Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc., et al.,

18

Case No. 23-13359 (Bankr. D.N.J. June 28, 2023) (Docket No. 1117); and

19

c.

failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted because Overstock has

20

no

21

Bankruptcy Court’s Sale Order (id.).

22

4.

successor

liability

with

respect

to

BBBY

pursuant

to

the

In order to properly investigate Plaintiff’s claims and prepare a response, Overstock

23 requests additional time.
24
25
26

1

Plaintiff named Overstock as a defendant, referring to the company’s prior name. Effective
November
6, 2023, Overstock.com, Inc. changed its corporate name to Beyond, Inc. (“Beyond”).
27
To avoid any confusion, in this Motion Defendant refers to itself as Overstock, consistent with
28 Plaintiff’s Complaint.
-2US-DOCS\153600699.1

Case 2:24-cv-01042-RFB-DJA Document 14 Filed 08/28/24 Page 3 of 4

1

5.

Although Plaintiff’s “service” on August 7, 2024, was ineffective, in an excess of

2 caution, and proceeding as though service did occur on August 7, Overstock requests an additional
3 14 days from August 28, 2024—to September 11, 2024 to file its response to the Complaint.
4

DATED this 28th day of August, 2024.

5

PISANELLI BICE PLLC

6
By:

7
8
9

/s/ Emily A. Buchwald
Todd L. Bice, Esq., #4534
Emily A. Buchwald, Esq., #13342
400 South 7th Street, Suite 300
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Eric R. Swibel, Esq.
(pro hac vice forthcoming)
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
330 North Wabash Avenue, Suite 2800
Chicago, Illinois 60611

10
11
12

Attorneys for Defendant Overstock.com, Inc.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

ORDER
For good cause appearing therein, Defendant's motion (ECF No. 14) is GRANTED. Defendant
Overstock.com, Inc. shall have until September 11, 2024 within which to respond to the
complaint.
DATED this 29th day of August, 2024.

21
__________________________
DANIEL J. ALBREGTS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-3US-DOCS\153600699.1

Case 2:24-cv-01042-RFB-DJA Document 14 Filed 08/28/24 Page 4 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that I am an employee of Pisanelli Bice PLLC, and that on the 28th day of August,
2024, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT (FIRST REQUEST) to be
electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court by using CM/ECF service and serving on all parties
of record via U.S. Mail as follows:
Anthony Mitchell
412 Viewmont
Henderson, NV 89015
Pro Se

11
12
13
14

/s/ Kimberly Peets
An employee of Pisanelli Bice PLLC

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-4US-DOCS\153600699.1