Datatreasury Corporation v. Wells Fargo & Company et al

Filing 687

MOTION for Leave to File Excess Pages by Unionbancal Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit UnionBanCal's Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Motion for Clarification#2 Text of Proposed Order)(Ainsworth, Jennifer)

Datatreasury Corporation v. Wells Fargo & Company et al

Doc. 687

Case 2:06-cv-00072-DF-CMC

Document 687

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION DATATREASURY CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No. 2-06CV-72

UNIONBANCAL CORPORATION'S MOTION TO EXCEED PAGE LIMITATION Defendant UnionBanCal Corporation ("UnionBanCal") files this motion to exceed page limitations in Defendant UnionBanCal Corporation's Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion for Clarification or for a Protective Order Regarding Discovery Order (D.E. No. 597) and Enlargement of Time. 1. UnionBanCal seeks leave to exceed the five-page limit for reply briefs to opposed

non-dispositive motions in order to explain fully the basis of its Reply and to provide a sufficient description of the issues raised by Plaintiff in its opposition to UnionBanCal's Motion so that the Court can make a fully informed decision. UnionBanCal's Reply needs to include additional pages in order to explain how UnionBanCal's Motion neither is untimely nor improperly narrows the basis of Plaintiff's discovery request; how the Motion correctly applies federal banking statutes and regulations to the discovery request due to the confidential information contained in the responsive documents thereto; and how the Plaintiff erroneously contends that

700685028v2

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:06-cv-00072-DF-CMC

Document 687

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 2 of 3

the production of responsive documents by UnionBanCal is covered by the current Protective Order. 2. In order to describe these issues adequately, UnionBanCal seeks leave to file a 10-

page Reply. See Exhibit 1, Defendant UnionBanCal Corporation's Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion for Clarification or for a Protective Order Regarding Discovery Order (D.E. No. 597) and Enlargement of Time. 3. Counsel for UnionBanCal was has conferred with counsel for plaintiff who has

indicated that DataTreasury does not oppose this Motion to Exceed Page Limitation. 4. this motion. Respectfully submitted, May 4, 2007 /s/ Jennifer Parker Ainsworth________________________ Jennifer Parker Ainsworth Texas Bar No. 00784720 WILSON, SHEEHY, KNOWLES, ROBERTSON & CORNELIUS, P.C. 909 ESE Loop 323 Suite 400 Tyler, Texas 75701 T: [phone] F: [phone] [e-mail] Raymond L. Sweigart (pro hac vice) Scott J. Pivnick (pro hac vice) PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP 1650 Tysons Blvd. McLean, VA 22102-4859 T: [phone] F: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant, UnionBanCal Corporation
2
700685028v2

Based upon the foregoing, UnionBanCal respectfully requests that the Court grant

Case 2:06-cv-00072-DF-CMC

Document 687

Filed 05/04/2007

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court's CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3) on this the 4th day of May, 2007. /s/ Jennifer Parker Ainsworth__________________

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE Counsel for Defendant UnionBanCal hereby certifies that UnionBanCal's counsel has conferred with counsel for the Plaintiff to determine if Plaintiff opposes this motion and that Plaintiff's counsel indicated that plaintiff DataTreasury does not oppose this Motion. /s/ Jennifer Parker Ainsworth__________________

3
700685028v2