Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc

Filing 56

MEMORANDUM in Support re 54 Second MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment filed by Impulse Marketing Group Inc. (Ivey, Floyd)

Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc

Doc. 56

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 56

Filed 09/06/2005

1

Floyd E. Ivey Liebler, Ivey & Connor, P.S. 3 1141 N. Edison, Suite C P.O. Box 6125 4 Kennewick, WA 99336 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
2 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Memorandum Supporting Defendant's Second Motion For Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment - 1.
LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE Attorneys at Law P.O. Box 6125 Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125 [phone]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) Pl a i n t i f f s ) ) vs. ) ) IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC., ) a Nevada Corporation, ) ) Defendants ) ___________________________________ ) IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC., ) ) Third-Party Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) BONNIE GORDON, JAMES S. GORDON, ) III, JONATHAN GORDON, JAMILA ) GORDON, ROBERT PRITCHETT and ) EMILY ABBEY, ) ) Third-Party Defendants. ) ___________________________________ ) JAMES S. GORDON, JR., an individual residing in Benton County, Washington, NO. CV-04-5125-FVS MEMORANDUM SUPPORTING DEFENDANT'S SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS OR FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION

Defendant has filed its Answer with Counter Claims and a Third-Party Complaint. Plaintiff has not filed a responsive pleading. Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaims and Third Party Complaint. Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss was extended by order of the court to September 7, 2005.

Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for S u m m a r y Judgment\DefendantsSecondMotionExtension.050906\Defendants.Memorandum. Supporting.Defendant.Second.Motion.Extension.Time.File.Response.050906.wpd

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 56

Filed 09/06/2005

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 27 28

Defendant has filed its First Amended Defendant's Answer, Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint on September 6, 2005. Defendant requests a further extension of time to file its Response to Plaintiff's Motion to September 21, 2005 or in the alternative the Defendant requests that Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss be stricken in light of Defendant's filing of its First Amended Defendant's Answer. A party may amend the party' pleading once as a matter of course at any s time before a responsive pleading is served. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 15(a); Ascon Properties, Inc. v. Mobil Oil Co. 866 F.2d 1149, 1160 (9th. Cir. Cal. 1989). Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss is not a responsive pleading. FRCP 7(a) defines "pleadings" as a complaint and answer; a reply to a counterclaim; an answer to a cross-claim; and a third party complaint and answer. Anything else is a motion or paper. The requirement in Rule 8(c) that a party set forth the affirmative defenses listed in that rule applies only to responsive "pleadings," not to motions. A motion to dismiss is not a pleading. Morrison v. Mahoney 399 F.3d 1042, 1046 (9th Cir. Mont. 2005). Defednant requests either an extension of time to September 21, 2005 for the filing of its Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss or alternatively for Plaintiff's Motion to be stricken in light of the filing of First Amended Defendant's Answer, Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint. DATED this 6th day of September, 2005. LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE By /s/ FLOYD E. IVEY FLOYD E. IVEY, WSBA #6888 Local Counsel for Defendant

Memorandum Supporting Defendant's Second Motion For Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment - 2.

Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for S u m m a r y Judgment\DefendantsSecondMotionExtension.050906\Defendants.Memorandum. Supporting.Defendant.Second.Motion.Extension.Time.File.Response.050906.wpd

LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE Attorneys at Law P.O. Box 6125 Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125 [phone]

Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS

Document 56

Filed 09/06/2005

1 2 3 4 5

KLEIN, ZELMAN, ROTHERMEL & DICHTER, LLP By PETER J. GLANTZ by telephone authority by /S/FLOYD E. IVEY PETER J. GLANTZ Attorneys for Defendant

I hereby certify that on September 6, 2005, I electronically filed Defendant's Memorantum in Support of Defendant's Second Motion for 7 Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System 8 which will send notification of such filing to Douglas E. McKinley, Jr. and transmitted via internet to Peter Glantz.
6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Memorandum Supporting Defendant's Second Motion For Extension of Time to File Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment - 3.
LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE Attorneys at Law P.O. Box 6125 Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125 [phone]

S/ FLOYD E. IVEY FLOYD E. IVEY

Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for S u m m a r y Judgment\DefendantsSecondMotionExtension.050906\Defendants.Memorandum. Supporting.Defendant.Second.Motion.Extension.Time.File.Response.050906.wpd