Application and OrderCal. Super. - 6th Dist.September 15, 2021jeffer Mangels Butler 8t Mitchell LLP JMBM 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 21 CV386912 Santa Clara - Civil JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP MARK S. ADAMS (Bar N0. 125485) markadams@jmbm. com JON A. WEININGER (Bar No. 216744) jweininger@jmbm.com 3 Park Plaza, Suite 1100 Irvine, California 92614-2592 Telephone: (949) 623-7200 Facsimile: (949) 623-7202 Attorneys for Defendants CHRISTY JIHEE RYOO; K&L SUPPLY C0,, INC; YBL HOLDINGS, INC.; SKYLARS LLC; and K&L SUPPLY KOREA, CO., LTD. R. Arag Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 11/1 5/2021 3:38 PM Reviewed By: R. Aragon Case #21 CV38691 2 Envelope: 7666542 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA YEO BAI LEE, Plaintiff, V. CHRISTY JIHEE RYOO; K&L SUPPLY C0., INC; YBL HOLDINGS, INC; SKYLARS LLC; K&L SUPPLY KOREA, C0., LTD; and DOES 1 To 25, INCLUSIVE, Defendants. Case No. 21CV386912 DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO SUBMIT SUR-REPLY AND SUR-ARGUMENT EVIDENCE IN RE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [Declarations ofChristy Jihee Ryoo and Jeflrey Ryan, filed herewith] Date: November 3, 2021 Time: 9:00 am. Dept: 12 Judge: Hon. Helen E. Williams Action Filed: September 15, 2021 Trial Date: None Defendants Christy Jihee Ryoo (“Ryoo”), K&L Supply Co., Inc., YBL Holdings, Inc., Skylars LLC, and K&L Supply Korea, Co., Ltd. hereby submit this application for an Order t0 submit Sur-Reply and Sur-Argument evidence in re Order t0 Show Cause Re: Preliminary Injunction sought by PlaintiffYeo Bai Lee, aka Joseph Lee, (“ML Lee”). DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO SUBMIT SUR-REPLY AND SUR-ARGUMENT EVIDENCE jeffer Mangels Butler 8: Mitchell LLP JMBM flONUl-PUJN 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Mr. Lee and his counsel presented new matter and arguments in Mr. Lee’s reply and supporting declarations and documents, and also in the hearing 0n the Order to Show Cause 0n November 3, 2021. The presentation 0f that new matter and arguments violates the long-standing rule against doing so in a reply. As the court stated in Allen v. City ofSacramento (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 41, 52, as modified 0n denial afreh’g (Mar. 6, 2015), “. .. we d0 not consider points raised for the first time in the reply brief absent a showing 0f good cause for the failure t0 present them earlier. .. This rule is based 0n considerations 0f fairness-withholding a point until the closing brief deprives the opposing party of the opportunity to file a written response unless supplemental briefing is ordered. . . .” further briefing. See also, Jay v. Mahaffey (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 1522, 1537-1538 (under general rule of motion practice, new evidence not permitted with reply papers and is only allowed in exceptional cases); Alliant Ins. Services, Inc. v. Gaddy (2008) 15 Ca1.App.4th 1292, 1307-1308, (court has discretion t0 accept new evidence in reply papers as long as opposing party given opportunity to respond). Counsel for Ryoo objected to the presentation 0f the new matter and arguments at the hearing. At this point, it is unclear Whether this court Will entertain the new matter and arguments. In the event that this court should determine to consider the new matter and arguments, Ryoo applies for and submits that good cause exists for Ryoo and the defendants to offer sur-reply evidence t0 the court to consider in rebuttal to the new matter and arguments, as provided herewith. DATED: November 5, 2021 JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP MARK S. ADAMS JON A. WEININGE By: MARK s. ADAMS Attorneys f r Defendants CHRISTY JIHEE RYOO, K&L SUPPLY C0,, INC., YBL HOLDINGS, INC., SKYLARS LLC, and K&L SUPPLY KOREA, CO., LTD., DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO SUBMIT SUR-REPLY AND SUR-ARGUMENT EVIDENCE