Message: Apple Buys Back 14 Billion In 2 Weeks
ANTON HANDAL (Bar No. 113812)
PAMELA C. CHALK (Bar No. 216411)
GABRIEL HEDRICK (Bar No. 220649)
H
ANDAL & ASSOCIATES
1200 Third Avenue, Suite 1321
San Diego, California 92101
Tel: 619.544.6400
Fax: 619.696.0323
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
e.Digital Corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
Lite-On IT Corporation; and, Lite-On
Sales And Distribution Inc.,
Defendants.
Case No. 3:14-cv-00092-H-BGS
PLAINTIFF E.DIGITAL
CORPORATION’S UNOPPOSED
EX PARTE
MOTION TO
EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANT LITE-ON SALES
AND DISTRIBUTION INC. TO
RESPOND TO THE
COMPLAINT UNTIL MARCH
10, 2014 OR WHATEVER DATE
THE COURT DEEMS JUST AND
REASONABLE UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Assigned to the Honorable
Judge Marilyn L. Huff
Courtroom 15A (Annex)
TO THE CLERK OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA:
Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 12.1 and 7.2, Plaintiff e.Digital Corporation
(“Plaintiff”) hereby presents this
ex parte motion for an order extending the time
for Defendant Lite-On Sales And Distribution Inc. (“Defendant Lite-On Sales”) to
respond to the Complaint (“Complaint”). (Dkt #1). Plaintiff filed a Complaint in
this action against the Defendants in this matter on or about January 13, 2014.
(Dkt #1). None of the Defendants have appeared or otherwise responded to the
Complaint in this case to date. It is anticipated that this motion is unopposed.
I. THE STATUS OF SERVICE UPON THE DEFENDANTS
A. LITE-ON SALES AND DISTRIBUTION INC.
Plaintiff has served the Summons and Complaint upon Defendant Lite-On
Sales on or about January 16, 2014. (
See, Dkt #8). Defendant Lite-On Sales’
response to the Complaint is currently due on or before February 6, 2014.
B. LITE-ON IT CORPORATION
Plaintiff has also served a Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of
Service of Summons (“Summons”) as well as a copy of the Complaint upon
Defendant Lite-On It Corporation (“Defendant Lite-On”) on or about January 29,
2014. Defendant Lite-On, a Taiwan business entity, has not yet returned Plaintiff’s
Request for Waiver of Service of Summons. Defendant Lite-On via its general
counsel has indicated via email that its current position is that it is refusing to
return the Waiver of Service of Summons (“waiver”).
Plaintiff, in good faith, will continue to work with Defendant Lite-On and/or
its counsel to see if Defendant Lite-On will change its mind and return the waiver.
If Plaintiff does not receive the Waiver of Service of Summons from Defendant
Lite-On on or before March 31, 2014 and/or Defendant Lite-On continues to refuse
to provide the waiver, Plaintiff will take measures thereafter to have the Court
deem that Defendant Lite-On has been served and/or Plaintiff will take measures to
have Defendant Lite-On personally served with the Summons and Complaint.
Defendant Lite-On and Defendant Lite-On Sales have the same general
counsel and/or apparent agents who have contact Plaintiff’s counsel to discuss this
matter. Defendant Lite-On and Defendant Lite-On Sales are referred to herein as " DEFENDANTS "
II. BASIS FOR REQUEST FOR EXTENSION
Plaintiff is still waiting for Defendant Lite-On to return the Waiver of
Service of Summons. Plaintiff needs more time to work with Defendant Lite-On
to see if it will return the waiver as requested.
Additionally, to date, the general counsel and/or an apparent authorized
agent of the Defendants has indicated a willingness to discuss settlement of this
matter. Time is further needed for the parties to discuss the possible resolution of
this matter. If a resolution can be reached in this matter, most likely such a
resolution would be a global resolution that would resolve this case in its entirety
as to all the parties.
With the above in mind, Plaintiff seeks an extension of time for Defendant
Lite-On Sales to respond to the Complaint not for delay, but to, among other
things, permit the parties an opportunity to resolve Plaintiff’s claims without the
need for further litigation. An extension of time is further needed so Plaintiff can
have more time to work with Defendant Lite-On to see if it will return the Waiver
of Service of Summons as requested.
III. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully requests that Defendant Lite-On Sales be
provided an extension of time to respond to the Complaint until March 10, 2014 or
whatever date the Court deems just and reasonable under the circumstances.
Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.2, Plaintiff will separately submit a Proposed
Order granting the relief requested.
Dated: February 5, 2014
HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
By: /s/Pamela C. Chalk
Anton N. Handal
Pamela C. Chalk
Gabriel G. Hedrick
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation
18 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply