Experience Hendrix LLC et al v. HendrixLicensing.com Ltd et al

Filing 226

MINUTE ORDER granting Plaintiffs' 222 Motion to Reopen Case ; vacating 209 Order dismissing case with prejudice and without costs ; directing plaintiffs' counsel to pay $200 to Washington State Bar Foundation, and file proof of such payment within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order ; directing Clerk to enter judgment and close case. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(SWT)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 EXPERIENCE HENDRIX, L.L.C., et al., 8 9 10 Plaintiffs, C09-285 TSZ v. ORDER HENDRIXLICENSING.COM, LTD, et al., 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Defendants. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on plaintiffs’ motion to reopen this case, docket no. 222. By Order entered July 21, 2015, docket no. 209, this case was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, provided that a motion to reopen could be filed in the event that settlement was not perfected. By Minute Order entered August 4, 2015, docket no. 212, the deadline for any such motion to reopen was extended to July 31, 2020. Having been timely filed, plaintiffs’ motion to reopen, docket no. 222, is GRANTED, and the Order dismissing this case with prejudice and without costs, docket no. 209, is VACATED. Pursuant to the parties’ Settlement Agreement, Ex. A to Stickney Decl. (docket no. 223-1), in the event of defendant Andrew Pitsicalis’s default in timely making 22 23 ORDER - 1 1 payments, plaintiffs were authorized to seek entry of a stipulated final judgment in the 2 form attached as Exhibit B to the Settlement Agreement, which sets forth as the judgment 3 amount “five hundred fifty thousand dollars ($550,000), less the amount of any principal 4 payments that have already been paid.” See Ex. B to Ex. A to Stickney Decl. (docket 5 no. 223-1 at 19). When plaintiffs first sought entry of a judgment, they asserted that 6 defendants had paid only $49,500 to date, while defendants indicated they had in fact 7 paid $67,500. See Minute Order (docket no. 221). Plaintiffs now seek entry of a 8 judgment that credits defendants the full $67,500 they allege has been paid, but preserves 9 the right to later request additional amounts due. See Plas.’ Mot. at 5 (docket no. 222). 10 Defendants justifiably objected to plaintiffs’ proposal. See Defs.’ Resp. (docket no. 224). 11 Plaintiffs replied by stating the parties do not dispute that defendants owe plaintiffs 12 $482,500, which is the balance remaining after subtracting the $67,500 that defendants 13 assert they have paid. See Plas.’ Reply (docket no. 225). The Court interprets plaintiffs’ 14 representation as conceding that defendants have paid $67,500, and it will enter judgment 15 accordingly. 16 In the Minute Order entered June 14, 2017, docket no. 221, plaintiffs’ counsel was 17 reminded of his obligation to treat financial account numbers and other personal data 18 identifiers with utmost care to avoid the risk of identity theft and misappropriation of 19 funds. Despite such admonition, plaintiffs’ counsel has again filed, without redaction and 20 in the public view, a copy of a check apparently drawn on an account held by an entity 21 related to defendants. See Ex. C to Stickney Decl. (docket no. 223-3). Upon discovering 22 plaintiffs’ counsel disregard of Local Civil Rule 5.2(a)(4), the Court sealed the exhibit. 23 ORDER - 2 1 The exhibit, however, has been available to the public for over two months. As a penalty 2 for failure to comply with the rules and orders of this Court, plaintiffs’ counsel is hereby 3 DIRECTED to pay $200 to the Washington State Bar Foundation, and to file proof of 4 such payment within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order. 5 The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment consistent with this Order, to send a 6 copy of this Order and the Judgment to all counsel of record, and to CLOSE this case. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated this 24th day of August, 2017. 9 A 10 11 Thomas S. Zilly United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ORDER - 3

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?