John R Behrmann et al v. Michael Goldstein et al

Brief in Support to 348 MOTION for Leave to File Omnibus Brief to Motions to Dismiss re MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim , 331 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim , 316 MOTION to Dismiss

E.D. Va.November 10, 2016

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division ____________________________________ ) JOHN R. BEHRMANN, et al. ) Plaintiffs, ) v. ) Civil No. 1:16-cv-01228-CMH-TCB ) JOHN T. HOUK, II, et al. ) Defendants. ) ___________________________ ______) PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OMNIBUS OPPOSITION TO RENEWED MOTIONS TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FILED BY CERTAIN DEFENDANTS Plaintiffs, through their undersigned counsel, respectfully request the entry of an Order granting them leave to file an “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law in opposition to the various motions to dismiss filed by certain Defendants in the captioned proceeding. In support of this Motion, Plaintiffs respectfully advise the Court as follows: Several of the Defendants have filed renewed motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint [Dkt. 133] (“SAC”). Specifically, Defendants John T. Houk, II; Miriam M. Houk; John T. Houk, III; Janet J. Ridgely; Julie L. Houk; Dana C. Fenton; Todd Thibodeaux; Jonathan McGill; Julia Weltmann Healey; Congressional District Program; and Charity Admin, Inc. (collectively, “the Houk Defendants”) filed their renewed motion to dismiss the SAC on October 28, 2016 [Dkt. 324]; Defendant Robert H. Taggart, Jr. (“Taggart”) filed his renewed motion to dismiss the SAC on October 28, 2016 [Dkt. 317]; and, Defendant Robert Ben Kori & Associates (“Ben Kori”) filed its renewed motion to dismiss the SAC on October 31, 2016 [Dkt. 331]. The renewed motions to dismiss are very duplicative and repetitive of each other and the arguments contained in the various renewed dismissal motions overlap to a very Case 1:16-cv-01228-CMH-TCB Document 349 Filed 11/10/16 Page 1 of 5 PageID# 10465 2 substantial degree. For example, all of the foregoing Defendants have challenged the adequacy and sufficiency of the allegations in the SAC related to Plaintiffs’ claims for violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. (“RICO”). See Dkt. 324 at pp. 21-29; Dkt. 317 at pp. 7-12; Dkt. 331-1 at pp. 5-9. Defendants’ renewed motions to dismiss substantially overlap on other issues as well. The Houk Defendants and Taggart both argue that Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by applicable statutes of limitation. See Dkt. 324 at pp. 17-20; Dkt. 317 at pp. 2-4. While each of the Defendants asserts some issues unique to it (for instance, only the Houk Defendants expressly challenge Plaintiffs’ standing, Dkt. 324 at pp. 14-16), Defendants’ motions overlap and duplicate each other to a far greater degree than not. Indeed, Ben Kori and Taggart have each joined in the renewed motion to dismiss filed by the Houk Defendants. See Dkt. 331-1 at p. 1 (joinder by Ben Kori); Dkt. 328 (joinder by Taggart). The filing of an “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law by Plaintiffs -- responsive to all of the renewed motions -- would promote judicial economy and conserve the limited resources of the Court and the parties. The “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law would incorporate Plaintiffs’ responses in a single filing, 1 would avoid the unnecessary duplication of argument and would avoid the unnecessary review of multiple, repetitive filings by the Court and its staff. Moreover, the filing of an “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law harbors no prejudice to the Defendants, who would of course retain the right to prepare and file their rebuttal briefs respecting those portions of the “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law applicable to them. To fully and completely response to the renewed arguments asserted by Defendants, the “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law would by 1 The renewed motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Michael Goldstein, Christie Kennett and Husch Blackwell, LLP [Dkt. 281] is not addressed herein because Plaintiffs have already filed a responsive Brief in opposition. See Dkt. 300. Case 1:16-cv-01228-CMH-TCB Document 349 Filed 11/10/16 Page 2 of 5 PageID# 10466 3 necessity exceed the standard 30-page limitation imposed by this Court’s local rules; however, any such excess in pages is substantially outweighed by the interests of promoting judicial economy and the conservation of resources inherent in the filing of the proposed “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law. Moreover, Plaintiffs anticipate that the “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law will not exceed sixty pages in length. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request leave of the Court to file an “Omnibus” Memorandum of Law, not to exceed sixty pages in length, responsive to the renewed motions to dismiss filed by the Houk Defendants [Dkt. 324], Taggart [Dkt. 317] and Ben Kori [Dkt. 331]. JOHN R. BEHRMANN and NANCY P. BEHRMANN By:_____/s/_Nathan D. Rozsa, Esq.____ Counsel Scott A. Surovell, Esq., VSB #40278 Nathan D. Rozsa, Esq. VSB # 77268 Surovell Isaacs Petersen & Levy PLC 4010 University Drive, 2nd Floor Fairfax, VA 22030 Telephone: 703-251-5400 Facsimile: 703-591-9285 ssurovell@siplfirm.com nrozsa@siplfirm.com Local Counsel for the Behrmanns DATED: November 10, 2016 Case 1:16-cv-01228-CMH-TCB Document 349 Filed 11/10/16 Page 3 of 5 PageID# 10467 4 Certificate of Service I certify that on November 10, 2016, I will electronically file the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing (NEF) to the following: Erika L. Morabito, Esq. Brittany J. Nelson, Esq. FOLEY & LARDNER, LLP 3000 K Street, NW – 6 th Floor Washington, D.C. 20007 emorabito@foley.com bnelson@foley.com Counsel for Houk Defendants David B. Goroff, Esq. FOLEY & LARDNER, LLP 321 North Clark Street Chicago, Illinois 60654-5313 dgoroff@foley.com Telephone: 312.832.4500 Facsimile: 312.832.4700 Counsel for Houk Defendants Edith R. Matthai, Esq. T. John Fitzgibbons, Jr., Esq. David J. Weinman, Esq. Gabrielle M. Jackson, Esq. ROBIE & MATTHAI, P.C. 500 S. Grand Avenue, 15 th Floor Los Angeles, California 90071 ematthai@romalaw.com jfitzgibbons@romalaw.com weinmandavid95@mail.com gjackson@romalaw.com Counsel for Houk Defendants Stephen B. Sadowsky, Esq. LIGHTFOOT, STEINGARD & SADOWSKY, LLP 800 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1050 Los Angeles, California 90017 ssadowsky@lsslaw.com Counsel for Robert H. Taggart, Jr. A. Joel Richlin, Esq. Tony Tootell, Esq. FOLEY & LARDNER, LLP 555 South Flower Street, Suite 3500 Los Angeles, California 90071-2411 jrichlin@foley.com ttootell@foley.com Counsel for Houk Defendants Gordon Davenport, III, Esq. FOLEY & LARDNER, LLP 150 East Gilman Street, Suite 5000 Madison, Wisconsin 53701-1497 gdavenport@foley.com Counsel for Houk Defendants J. Peter Glaws IV, Esq. Kevin M. Murphy, Esq. CARR MALONEY, P.C. 2020 K. Street, NW, Suite 450 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 310-5500 (Telephone) (202) 310-5555 (Facsimile) jpg@carrmaloney.com Counsel for Defendant Robert Ben Kori & Associates Randall J. Dean, Esq. Mark Ernest DiMaria, Esq. CHAPMAN GLUCKSMAN & DEA 11900 W Olympic Blvd, Ste 800 P O Box 64704 Los Angeles, CA 90064-0704 Telephone: 310-207-7722 rdean@cgdrblaw.com mdimaria@cgdrblaw.com Counsel for Defendant Robert Ben Kori & Associates Case 1:16-cv-01228-CMH-TCB Document 349 Filed 11/10/16 Page 4 of 5 PageID# 10468 5 Denis H. Mark, Esq. DENIS H. MARK, P.C. 5105 DTC Parkway, Suite 475 Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111 dmark@dhmpc.com Counsel for Robert H. Taggart, Jr. James P. Fogelman, Esq. Shannon Edward Mader, Esq. Lily Bu, Esq. GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER, LLP 333 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, California 90071 jfogelman@gibsondunn.com smader@gibsondunn.com lbu@gibsondunn.com Telephone: 213.229.7000 Facsimile: 213.229.7520 Counsel for Husch Defendants Brandon L. Boxler, Esq. Jason C. Schwartz, Esq. GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER, LLP 1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20036 jschwartz@gibsondunn.com bboxler@gibsondunn.com Telephone: 213.229.7000 Facsimile: 213.229.7520 Counsel for Husch Defendants Gerald De Simone, Esq. DE SIMONE AND HUXSTER 28230 W Agoura Rd Ste 200 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 Telephone: 818-707-0727 Facsimile: 818-707-0757 desimonelaw@pacbell.net Counsel for Defendant Stellar Technology Solutions, LLC Collin Jefferson Hite, Esq. HIRSCHLER FLEISCHER PC 2100 E Cary St PO Box 500 Richmond, VA 23218-0500 Telephone: (804) 771-9500 Facsimile: 804-644-0957 chite@hf-law.com Counsel for Defendant Stellar Technology Solutions, LLC /s/ Nathan D. Rozsa . Scott A. Surovell, Esq., VSB #40278 Nathan D. Rozsa, Esq., VSB #77268 SUROVELL ISAACS PETERSEN & LEVY PLC 4010 University Drive, 2nd Floor Fairfax, VA 22030 Telephone: 703.251.5400 Facsimile: 703.591.9285 ssurovell@siplfirm.com nrozsa@siplfirm.com Local Counsel for the Behrmanns Case 1:16-cv-01228-CMH-TCB Document 349 Filed 11/10/16 Page 5 of 5 PageID# 10469