Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc

Filing 140

ORDER GRANTING 121 MOTION TO RESCHEDULE and Granting 119 Motion to Expedite . The 11/2/05 telephonic hearing is Stricken. Issue of rescheduling plaintiff's motion will be addressed at the scheduling conference on 11/4/05. Signed by Judge Fred Van Sickle. (SAP, Case Administrator)

Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc

Doc. 140

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 140

Filed 10/25/2005

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

JAMES S. GORDON, JR., an individual residing in Benton County, Washington, Plaintiff, v. IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC.,a Nevada Corporation, Defendant. IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC., Third-Party Plaintiff, BONNIE GORDON, JAMES S. GORDON, III, JONATHAN GORDON, JAMILA GORDON, ROBERT PRITCHETT and EMILY ABBEY, Third-Party Defendants.

No. CV-04-5125-FVS ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RESCHEDULE

BEFORE THE COURT is Defendant's Motion to Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, Ct. Rec. 121. are represented by Douglas McKinley. Plaintiffs

Defendant Impulse Marketing The Court has reviewed

Group, Inc., is represented by Floyd Ivey. the entire file and is prepared to rule.

Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Third-Party Defendants and Counterclaims Under FRCP 12(b)(6) or in the alternative Motion for Summary Judgment under FRCP 56 or in the alternative to Dismiss under FRCP 9(b) (Ct. Rec. 40) is noted for a telephonic hearing on November

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RESCHEDULE - 1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 140

Filed 10/25/2005

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

2, 2005.

Defendant now moves to reschedule that hearing until it has

conducted sufficient discovery to permit it to respond to Plaintiff's Statements of Material Fact 4, 6, 10-17, and 25. The Court

determines a continuance under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f) is appropriate to permit the parties to conduct discovery in this matter. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. 2. Defendant's Motion to Expedite, Ct. Rec. 119, is GRANTED. Defendant's Motion to Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff's The November

Motion for Summary Judgment, Ct. Rec. 121, is GRANTED.

2, 2005, telephonic hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims and Third Party Defendants Under FRCP 12(b)(6) or in the Alternative For Summary Judgment Under FRCP 56 or in the Alternative To Dismiss Under FRCP 9(b), Ct. Rec. 40, is STRICKEN. Plaintiffs' motion will be rescheduled when sufficient discovery has been conducted to enable Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's statement of material facts. The Court will address the issue of

rescheduling Plaintiff's motion at the Scheduling Conference on Friday, November 4, 2005. The parties shall include in their Joint

Status Certificate, an anticipated date at which time the Court may re-note Plaintiff's motion. IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Executive is hereby

directed to enter this Order and furnish copies to counsel. DATED this 25th day of October, 2005. s/ Fred Van Sickle Fred Van Sickle United States District Judge ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO RESCHEDULE - 2