Gordon v. Impulse Marketing Group Inc Doc.

131
Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS Document 131 Filed 10/21/2005

1
2 Floyd E. Ivey
Liebler, Ivey & Connor, P.S.
3 1141 N. Edison, Suite C
P.O. Box 6125
4 Kennewick, WA 99336
Telephone (509) 735-3581
5 Fax (509) 735-3585
6
7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
8
9 JAMES S. GORDON, JR., an individual ) NO. CV-04-5125-FVS
residing in Benton County, Washington,
)
10 )
Plaintiffs ) DEFENDANT’S REPLY
11 ) TO PLAINTIFF’S
vs. ) MEMORANDUM IN
12 ) OPPOSITION TO
IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC., ) DEFENDANT’S MOTION
13 a Nevada Corporation, ) TO RESCHEDULE OR
) STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S
14 Defendants ) MOTION FOR SUMMARY
___________________________________ ) JUDGMENT
15 IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC., )
)
16 Third-Party Plaintiff, )
)
17 vs. )
)
18 BONNIE GORDON, JAMES S. GORDON, )
III, JONATHAN GORDON, JAMILA )
19 GORDON, ROBERT PRITCHETT and )
EMILY ABBEY, )
20 )
Third-Party Defendants. )
21 ___________________________________ )
22 Defendant has withdrawn its Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, without
23 prejudice.
24 Defendant has moved to Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff’s Motion for
25 Summary Judgment with hearing without oral argument set for October 25, 2005
26 at 6:30 p.m.
27 Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is presently set for November 2,
28 Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Memo Opposition to Defendant’s LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE
Attorneys at Law
Motion to Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff’s MSJ - 1. P.O. Box 6125
Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for
S u m m a r y Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125
(509) 735-3581
Judgment\MotionRespondStatementMaterialFact\Defendant'sReplyPlaintiff'
sResp
DefMotRescheduleStrikePlaintiffMSY.051021.wpd
Dockets.Justia.com
 Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS Document 131 Filed 10/21/2005

1 2005. Defendant brings to the court’s attention that Plaintiff has not filed its LR
2 56.1 Reply in response to Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Statement of
3 Material Fact which was filed October 14, 2005. The Defendant observes that the
4 Court’s Order of October 7, 2005 granting Defendant authority to file Defendants
5 Response to Plaintiff’s Statement of Material Fact concluded with the statement
6 “Defendant’s Reply Statement of Material Facts shall be filed by 5 p.m. on
7 October 21, 2005.” It is likely that the filing of a Reply Statement referred to the
8 Plaintiff and not to the Defendant.
9 Plaintiff has Responded, on October 20, 2005, to Defendant’s Motion to
10 Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment by its
11 MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
12 RESCHEDULE OR STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
13 JUDGMENT.
14 Therein, at page 2/lines 13-14 Plaintiff states “The Plaintiff therefore agrees
15 with the Defendant that the Court should strike the Plaintiff’s pending motion.”
16 with the qualification that the Court first dismisses the Defendant’s counterclaims
17 and Third Party claims. These positions are mutually exclusive. Either the
18 pending Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is rescheduled or stricken or
19 the Court must hear and decide. Plaintiff makes perfectly clear that its Motion for
20 Summary Judgment is limited to Defendant’s counterclaims and Third Party
21 Claims.
22 Inexplicitly Plaintiff does not address the fact that there has been no
23 discovery in this case. The Defendant has asserted, in the Defendant’s Motion to
24 Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, that Defendant is
25 unable to respond to Plaintiff’s LR 56.1 Statement of Material Facts without
26 Discovery on the issues Plaintiff states as Material Facts. Plaintiff’s Statement of
27 Material Facts are largely a reassertion of the bear allegations from Plaintiff’s
28 Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Memo Opposition to Defendant’s LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE
Attorneys at Law
Motion to Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff’s MSJ - 2. P.O. Box 6125
Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for
S u m m a r y Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125
(509) 735-3581
Judgment\MotionRespondStatementMaterialFact\Defendant'sReplyPlaintiff'
sResp
DefMotRescheduleStrikePlaintiffMSY.051021.wpd
 Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS Document 131 Filed 10/21/2005

1 Complaint.
2 Plaintiff’s response is that Defendant’s inability to respond to Plaintiff’s
3 Statements of Material Fact is an admission “...that it cannot articulate
4 ...evidentiary support...” for the Defendant’s counterclaims and Third Party
5 Claims. Defendant’s burden, in Responding to Plaintiff’s LR56.1 Statement of
6 Material Fact, is relative to those facts which Plaintiff contends to be Material
7 Facts. Defendant’s burden, is not to recite Defendant’s basis for bringing the
8 counterclaims and Third Party Claims.
9 Plaintiff states, page 3/line 15, that “...the Defendant seeks the Court’s
10 permission to add further injury to the Plaintiff and the Third Party Defendants by
11 forcing them to incur the significant legal expenses that accompany formal
12 discovery...” Formal discovery is the means by which statements contended by a
13 party to be “Material Facts” are tested to see if they are disputed.
14 Plaintiff’s statement, page 3/line 20 to page 4/line 6, suggests that the
15 Defendant has wholly failed to respond to Plaintiff LR 56.1 Statement of Material
16 Fact. However, Defendant was able, without Discovery, to respond to Plaintiff’s
17 Statements of Material Fact 4, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 25 and 25 and to
18 respond in part to 14 and 18.
19 Defendant respectfully requests that discovery be allowed prior to the
20 hearing of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
21 DATED this 21th day of October, 2005.
22 LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE
23 By /s/ FLOYD E. IVEY
FLOYD E. IVEY, WSBA #6888
24 Local Counsel for Defendant
25
26
27
28 Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Memo Opposition to Defendant’s LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE
Attorneys at Law
Motion to Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff’s MSJ - 3. P.O. Box 6125
Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for
S u m m a r y Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125
(509) 735-3581
Judgment\MotionRespondStatementMaterialFact\Defendant'sReplyPlaintiff'
sResp
DefMotRescheduleStrikePlaintiffMSY.051021.wpd
 Case 2:04-cv-05125-FVS Document 131 Filed 10/21/2005

1 I hereby certify that on October 21, 2005, I electronically filed

DEFENDANT’S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM IN
2 OPPOSITION TO IMPULSE MARKETING GROUP, INC.,
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO RESCHEDULE OR STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S
3 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT with the Clerk of the Court using the
CM/ECF System which will send notification of such filing to Douglas E.
4 McKinley, Jr., Peter J. Glantz and Sean A. Moynihan. I hereby certify that I have
served the foregoing to the following non-CM/ECF participants by other means:
5 Bonnie Gordon, Jonathan Gordon, James S. Gordon, III, Robert Pritchett and
Emily Abbey. I hereby certify that I have served the foregoing to the following
6 persons who are non-CM/ECF participants named in this lawsuit, but who have
not yet been served or entered an appearance in this lawsuit by other means:
7 Jamila Gordon.
8
S/ FLOYD E. IVEY
9 FLOYD E. IVEY
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Memo Opposition to Defendant’s LIEBLER, IVEY, CONNOR, BERRY & ST. HILAIRE
Attorneys at Law
Motion to Reschedule or Strike Plaintiff’s MSJ - 4. P.O. Box 6125
Z:\IPClient\ImpulseMarketingGroup v. Gordon\Pleadings\Plaintiff Motion for
S u m m a r y Kennewick, Washington 99336-0125
(509) 735-3581
Judgment\MotionRespondStatementMaterialFact\Defendant'sReplyPlaintiff'
sResp
DefMotRescheduleStrikePlaintiffMSY.051021.wpd