Sui et al v. Wu et al

MOTION for leave to file Substituted Brief in Respnse to Motion to Dismiss

M.D. Fla.March 11, 2011

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION DR. HONGJIN SUI, and DALIAN HOFFEN BIO-TECHNIQUE CO., LTD., Plaintiffs, v. CASE NO.: 8-11cv-00037-SDM-TBM HARRY WU and THE LAOGAI RESEARCH FOUNDATION, Defendants. ____________________________________/ PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUBSTITUTED BRIEF IN RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, Dr. Hongjin Sui (“Sui”) and Dalian Hoffen Bio-Technique Co. Ltd. (“DHBC”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”), file this motion for leave to file a substituted brief in response to Defendant Harry Wu and Laogai Research Foundation’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint respectfully showing as follows: 1. On March 3, 2011, Plaintiffs timely filed their Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint with associated exhibits [Document 21]. 2. Shortly after filing, Plaintiffs realized that their 25 page response [Document 21] exceeded the 20 page limitation on response briefs set forth in Local Rule 3.01(b). 3. On March 8, 2011 Plaintiffs filed “Plaintiffs’ Substituted Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint” (“Substituted Response”) [Document 23] reducing the original filing by five pages from 25 pages to 20 pages to comply with Local Rule 3.01(b). 4. The Substituted Response [Document 23] made no new arguments and raised no new issues that were not presented in the original response. The brief was simply reduced by five pages Case 8:11-cv-00037-SDM-TBM Document 26 Filed 03/11/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID 497 ~ 2 ~ to meet the page requirements of Local Rule 3.01(b). 5. On March 11, 2011, the Court terminated Plaintiffs’ Substituted Response [Document 23] and instructed counsel to file a Motion for Leave to File the Substituted Response. 6. Plaintiffs now respectfully seek leave of court to file their Substituted Response to come within the page limitations of Rule 3.01(b). Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that they be allowed to file the Substituted Response of 20 pages to meet Local Rule 3.01(b), or alternatively, that leave be granted under Rule 3.01(d) and that Plaintiffs original response of 25 pages filed March 3, 2011 [Document 21], be accepted and considered by this Court. Respectfully submitted, this 11th day of March, 2011. /s/ Ezra B. Jones, III pro hac vice William J. Schifino, Jr., Esq. Florida Bar No. 564338 Daniel P. Dietrich, Esq. Florida Bar No. 934461 Williams Schifino Mangione & Steady, P.A. 201 N. Franklin Street, Suite 3200 Tampa, FL 33602 (813) 221-2626 (telephone) (813) 221-7335 (facsimile) e-mail: wschifino@wsmslaw.com e-mail: ddietrich@wsmslaw.com Ezra B. Jones III, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice) Pendergast & Jones, P.C. 115 Perimeter Center Place Suite 1000 South Terraces Atlanta, GA. 30346 (770) 392-0303 (telephone) (770) 392-0909 (facsimile) e-mail: ejones@penderlaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs Case 8:11-cv-00037-SDM-TBM Document 26 Filed 03/11/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID 498 ~ 3 ~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that, on March 11, 2011, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court by using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all CM/ECF participants. I further certify that I will mail the foregoing document and the notice of electronic filing by first-class mail to any non-CM/ECF participants. /s/ Ezra B. Jones, III pro hac vice Ezra B. Jones III, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice) Pendergast & Jones, P.C. 115 Perimeter Center Place Suite 1000 South Terraces Atlanta, GA. 30346 (770) 392-0303 (telephone) (770) 392-0909 (facsimile) e-mail: ejones@penderlaw.com Case 8:11-cv-00037-SDM-TBM Document 26 Filed 03/11/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID 499