Incentive Capital v. Camelot Entertainment Group et al
ORDER granting Stipulated 118 Motion to Stay. Signed by Magistrate Judge Samuel Alba on 10/14/11. (jmr)
U.S. DISn~ICT COURT'
Joseph G. Pia (9945)
Nathan S. Dorius (8977)
PIA ANDERSON DORIUS REYNARD & MOSS
222 South Main Street, Suite 1800
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
Telephone: (801) 350-9000
Facsimile: (801) 9S0-90 10
2011 OCT I '-I PI: 5 l
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAl, DIVISION
STIPULATED MOTION AND ORDER TO
ST AY ALL PROCEEDINGS
Civil No.2: 11-cv-00288
CAMELOT ENTERTAINMENT GROUP,
INC., a Delaware Corporation; CAMELOT
FILM GROUP. INC., a Nevada Corporation;
CAMELOT DISTRIBUTION GROUP, INC.,
a Nevada Corporation. ROBERT P. ATWELL
an individual; JAMIE R. THOMPSON, an
individual~ STEVEN ISTOCK, an individual;
TED BAER, an individual; PETER
JAROWEY, an individual,
Judge Clark Waddoups
Counsel for Plaintiff Incentive Capital, LLC ("Plaintiff' or "Incentive") and counsel for
Defendants Camelot Entertainment Group, Inc., Camelot Film Group, Inc., Camelot Distribution
Group Inc., Robert P. Atwell, Jamie R. Thompson, Steven Istock ("Camelot Defendants"), Ted
Baer, and Peter Jarowey hereby jointly move the Court for the entry of a stay of all proceedings
and deadlines in the above-referenced action while the parties seek to effectuate settlement, as
That a stay of all proceedings and deadlines be entered for approximately thirty
(30) days until November 14,2011 ("Stay Period") for all of the parties to continue settlement
discussions and settle this case if possible.
On or before November 14, 201 L Incentive will inform the Court as to its view of
the status of settlement discussions, and either file a dismissal with prejudice, or request that the
Court continue the case.
If the case is continued, the Defendants, and each of them, will have until
November 29,2011 to file a response to Incentive's Motion for Writ of Attachment [Docket
Entry No. 103].
During the Stay Period no attorney is obliged to file an Attorneys' Planning
Report or respond to the Attorneys' Planning Report which has been filed by Incentive.
Should the case proceed beyond the Stay Period, the dates proposed by Incentive
in its Attorneys' Planning Report will necessarily need to be changed. Therefore, Incentive
respectfully withdraws the Attorneys' Planning Report it recently filed [Docket Entry No. 116],
and reserves the right to refile such a report at a future date.
The parties request that the initial pretrial conference scheduled for November 9,
2011 be postponed and reset at the next available date should this case proceed beyond the Stay
Dennis R. James of Morgan Minnock Rice & James has made a special
appearance for the purpose of challenging jurisdiction on behalf of his client, Ted Baer. Dennis
R. James's signature on this Stipulated Motion shall in no way constitute a waiver or
compromise of Ted Baer's position that the Court does not have personal jurisdiction over him in
Wayne G. Petty of Moyle & Draper, P.c. has made a special appearance for the
purpose of challenging jurisdiction on behalfofhis client, Peter Jarowey. Wayne Petty's
signature on this Stipulated Motion shall in no way constitute a waiver or compromise of Peter
Jarowey's position that the Court does not have personal jurisdiction over him in this matter.
Dated: October 13.2011
PIA, ANDERSON, DORIUS, REYNARD &
MOYLE & DRAPER, P.c.
By: lsi Wayne G. Petty
Wayne G. Petty
By: lsi Joseph Pia
Attorneys/or Defendant Peter Jarowey
Attorneys for PlaintiffIncentive Capital, LLC
MORGAN MINNOCK RICE &
LEVITAN LAW OFFICES
By: lsi Jonathan Levitan·
By: lsi Dennis R. James
VAN COTT BAGLEY CORNALL &
Attorneyfor Defendant Ted Baer
By: lsi John Snow
Attorneys for Defendants Camelot
Entertainment Group, Inc., Camelot Film
Group, Inc., Camelot Distribution Group Inc.,
Robert P. Atwell, Jamie R. Thompson, Steven
ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
0 *(1 J
United States Magistrate Judge
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?