Indiezone, Inc. et al v. Rooke et al

RESPONSE

N.D. Cal.April 23, 2014

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 U.S. BANK’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS REGARDING AMENDMENT Case No. 13-cv-04280-VC JAMES R. MCGUIRE (CA SBN 189275) JMcGuire@mofo.com ANGELA E. KLEINE (CA SBN 255643) AKleine@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 Attorneys for Defendant U.S. Bank National Association UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION Indiezone, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and EoBuy, Limited an Irish private limited company, Plaintiffs, vs. Todd Rooke, Joe Rogness, Phil Hazel, Sam Ashkar, Holly Oliver and U.S. Bank, collectively the RICO Defendants; Jingit LLC., Jingit Holdings LLC., Jingit Financial, Services LLC., Music.Me, LLC., Tony Abena, John E. Fleming, Dan Frawley, Dave Moorehouse II, Chris Ohlsen, Justin James, Shannon Davis, Chris Karls in their capacities as officers, agents and/or employees of the Jingit LLC., Defendants in Negligence, and Aiding/ Abetting; Wal-Mart, General Electric, Target, DOE(s) and ROE(s) 1 through 10, Defendants in Negligence Secondary-Vicarious Infringement, Defendants. Case No. 3:13-cv-04280-VC DEFENDANT U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS’ (1) SECOND MOTION TO AMEND THEIR SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT AND (2) MOTION “REQUESTING AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO SUBMIT A CORRECTED RESPONSE AND/OR RENEW THEIR RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, DISMISS OR STAY THE PROCEEDINGS” Honorable Vince Chhabria Date: June 5, 2014 Time: 1:30 p.m. Place: Courtroom 4, 17th Floor Case3:13-cv-04280-VC Document99 Filed04/23/14 Page1 of 2 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 U.S. BANK’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS REGARDING AMENDMENT Case No. 13-cv-04280-VC 1 U.S. Bank hereby joins and incorporates by reference, as if fully set forth herein, the Jingit Defendants1 Responses (ECF Nos. 94, 95, 97) to (1) Plaintiffs’ Second Motion to Amend Their Summons and Complaint (ECF No. 90) and (2) Plaintiffs’ Motion “Requesting An Enlargement Of Time To Submit A Corrected Response And/Or Renew Their Response To The Defendants’ Motions To Compel Arbitration, Dismiss Or Stay The Proceedings” (ECF No. 91), and the Jingit Defendants’ arguments and supporting affidavits made thereto, in opposing plaintiffs’ motions on the grounds that plaintiffs’ request for another enlargement of time is procedurally improper and untimely and plaintiffs’ second proposed amendment to their complaint would be futile. Dated: April 23, 2014 JAMES R. MCGUIRE ANGELA E. KLEINE MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP By: /s/ Angela E. Kleine Angela E. Kleine Attorneys for Defendant U.S. Bank National Association sf-3409833 1 The “Jingit Defendants” are defined as the defendants Jingit, LLC, Jingit Holdings, LLC, Jingit Financial Services, LLC, Sam Ashkar, Phil Hazel, Holly Oliver, Shannon Davis, Justin James, Chris Ohlsen, Dan Frawley, Dave Moorehouse II, Tony Abena, Chris Karls, John E. Fleming, and Music.Me, LLC, Todd Rooke, and Joe Rogness. Case3:13-cv-04280-VC Document99 Filed04/23/14 Page2 of 2