`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`DOCUMENT SECURITY SYSTEMS,
`INC.
`
`CASE NO:
`2:17−cv−04263−JVS−JCG
`
`Plaintiff(s),
`
` v.
`
`CREE, INC.
`
`Defendant(s).
`
`INITIAL ORDER FOLLOWING
`FILING OF COMPLAINT
`ASSIGNED TO JUDGE SELNA
`
` Important Notice: The Court posts tentative law and motions rulings
` to the internet. Please see Section P, below
`
`COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF SHALL SERVE THIS ORDER ON ALL
`
`DEFENDANTS AND/OR THEIR COUNSEL ALONG WITH THE SUMMONS
`
`AND COMPLAINT, OR IF THAT IS NOT PRACTICABLE AS SOON AS
`
`POSSIBLE THEREAFTER. IF THIS CASE WAS ASSIGNED TO THIS
`
`COURT AFTER BEING REMOVED FROM STATE COURT, THE
`
`DEFENDANT WHO REMOVED THE CASE SHALL SERVE THIS ORDER
`
`ON ALL OTHER PARTIES.
`
`///
`
` −1−
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG Document 13 Filed 06/15/17 Page 2 of 9 Page ID #:123
` This case has been assigned to the calendar of Judge James V. Selna.
`
`The intent of this Order is to ensure that this case will proceed so as "to secure [a]
`
`just, speedy and inexpensive determination." (Fed.R.Civ. P., Rule 1.)
`
`A. THE COURT'S ORDERS
`
` Copies of Judge Selna’s orders that may have specific application to
`
`this case are available on the Central District of California website. See ¶ N.
`
`Those orders include the following:
`
`0
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
` (1) Order Setting Rule 26(f) Scheduling Conference
`
` (2) Order re Civil Jury Trials
`
` (3) Order re Civil Court Trials
`
` (3) Order re RICO Case Statement
`
`B. SERVICE OF PLEADINGS
`
` Although Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 4(m) does not require the summons and
`
`complaint to be served for as much as 120 days, the Court expects that the initial
`
`pleadings will be served much sooner than that, and will require plaintiff to show
`
`cause before then if it appears that there is undue delay.
`
`C. ASSIGNMENT TO A MAGISTRATE JUDGE
`
` Under 28 U.S.C. § 636, the parties may consent to have a Magistrate
`
`Judge preside over all proceedings, including trial. The Magistrate Judges who
`
`accept those designations are identified on the Central District’s website, which
`
`also contains the consent form. See ¶ N.
`
` −2−
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG Document 13 Filed 06/15/17 Page 3 of 9 Page ID #:124
`D. EX PARTE PRACTICE
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`Ex parte applications are solely for extraordinary relief and should
`
`be used with discretion. See Mission Power Engineering Company v.
`
`Continental Casualty Co., 883 F. Supp. 488 (C. D. Cal. 1995). The Court will
`
`generally decide ex parte matters on the papers. Opposition to an ex parte
`
`application, if any, should be submitted within 24 hours.
`
`E. APPLICATIONS AND STIPULATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS
`
`0
`
`OF TIME
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
` No stipulations extending scheduling requirements or modifying
`
`applicable rules are effective until and unless the Court approves them. Both
`
`applications and stipulations must set forth:
`
` 1. The existing due date or hearing date;
`
` 2. Specific, concrete reasons supporting good cause for granting
`
`the extension. In this regard, a statement that an extension "will promote
`
`settlement" is insufficient. The requesting party or parties must indicate the
`
`status of ongoing negotiations: Have written proposals been exchanged? Is
`
`counsel in the process of reviewing a draft settlement agreement? Has a mediator
`
`been selected?
`
` 3. Whether there have been prior requests for extensions, and
`
`whether these were granted or denied by the Court.
`
`///
`
`///
`
` −3−
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG Document 13 Filed 06/15/17 Page 4 of 9 Page ID #:125
`F. TROs AND INJUNCTIONS
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
` Parties seeking emergency or provisional relief shall comply with
`
`F.R.Civ.P., Rule 65 and Local Rule 65. The Court will not rule on any
`
`application for such relief for at least 24 hours after the party subject to the
`
`requested order has been served; such party may file opposing or responding
`
`papers in the interim.
`
`G. CASES REMOVED FROM STATE COURT
`
`0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
` All documents filed in state court, including documents appended to
`
`the complaint, answers and motions, must be refiled in this Court as a supplement
`
`to the Notice of Renewal, if not already included. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(a),(b). If
`
`the defendant has not yet answered or moved, the answer or responsive pleading
`
`filed in this Court must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the
`
`Local Rules of the Central District. If before the case was removed a motion was
`
`pending in state court, it must be re−noticed in accordance with Local Rule 7.
`
`H. STATUS OF FICTITIOUSLY NAMED DEFENDANTS
`
` This Court intends to adhere to the following procedures where a matter
`
`is removed to this Court on diversity grounds with fictitiously named defendants.
`
`(See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(a) and 1447.)
`
` 1. Plaintiff is normally expected to ascertain the identity of and
`
`serve any fictitiously named defendants within 120 days of the removal of the action
`
`to this Court.
`
`///
`
` −4−
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG Document 13 Filed 06/15/17 Page 5 of 9 Page ID #:126
` 2. If plaintiff believes (by reason of the necessity for discovery or
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`otherwise) that fictitiously named defendants cannot be fully identified within the
`
`120−day period, an ex parte application requesting permission to extend that period
`
`to effectuate service may be filed with this Court. Such application shall state the
`
`reasons therefor, and may be granted upon a showing of good cause. The ex parte
`
`application shall be served upon all appearing parties, and shall state that appearing
`
`parties may comment within seven (7) days of the filing of the ex parte application.
`
` 3. If plaintiff desires to substitute a named defendant for one of the
`
`fictitiously named parties, plaintiff first shall seek to obtain consent from counsel
`
`for the previously−identified defendants (and counsel for the fictitiously named
`
`party, if that party has separate counsel). If consent is withheld or denied, plaintiff
`
`may apply ex parte requesting such amendment, with notice to all appearing
`
`parties. Each party shall have seven calendar days to respond. The ex parte
`
`application and any response should comment not only on the substitution of the
`
`named party for a fictitiously named defendant, but on the question of whether the
`
`matter should thereafter be remanded to the Superior Court if diversity of
`
`citizenship is destroyed by the addition of the new substituted party. See U.S.C. §
`
`1447(c), (d).
`
`I. BANKRUPTCY APPEALS
`
` Counsel shall comply with the ORDER RE PROCEDURE TO BE
`
`FOLLOWED IN APPEAL FROM BANKRUPTCY COURT issued at the time the
`
`appeal is filed in the District Court.
`
`///
`
`///
`
`///
`
` −5−
`
`0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG Document 13 Filed 06/15/17 Page 6 of 9 Page ID #:127
`J. MOTIONS UNDER FED.R.CIV.P. RULE 12
`
` Many motions to dismiss or to strike could be avoided if the parties
`
`confer in good faith (as they are required to do under L.R. 7−3), especially for
`
`perceived defects in a complaint, answer or counterclaim which could be corrected
`
`by amendment. See Chang v. Chen, 80 F.3d 1293, 1296 (9th Cir. 1996) (where a
`
`motion to dismiss is granted, a district court should provide leave to amend unless
`
`it is clear that the complaint could not be saved by any amendment). Moreover, a
`
`party has the right to amend his complaint "once as a matter of course at any time
`
`0
`
`before a responsive pleading is served." Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 15(a). A 12(b)(6)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`motion is not a responsive pleading and therefore plaintiff might have a right to
`
`amend. See Nolen v. Fitzharris, 450 F.2d 958, 958−59 (9th Cir. 1971); St.
`
`Michael’s Convalescent Hospital v. California, 643 F.2d 1369, 1374 (9th Cir.
`
`1981). And even where a party has amended his Complaint once or a responsive
`
`pleading has been served, the Federal Rules provide that leave to amend should be
`
`"freely given when justice so requires." F.R.Civ.P., Rule 15(a). The Ninth Circuit
`
`requires that this policy favoring amendment be applied with "extreme liberality."
`
`Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. Rose, 893 F.2d 1074, 1079 (9th Cir. 1990).
`
` These principles require that counsel for the plaintiff should carefully
`
`evaluate the defendant’s contentions as to the deficiencies in the complaint, and
`
`that in many instances the moving party should agree to any amendment that would
`
`cure a curable defect.
`
` The moving party shall attach a copy of the challenged pleading to the
`
`Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of the motion.
`
`///
`
`///
`
` −6−
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG Document 13 Filed 06/15/17 Page 7 of 9 Page ID #:128
` The foregoing provisions apply as well to motions to dismiss a
`
`counterclaim, answer or affirmative defense, which a plaintiff might contemplate
`
`bringing.
`
`K. REQUIREMENTS FOR BRIEFS
`
` In addition to the requirements in Local Rule 11, the Court requires
`
`the following for all briefs:
`
`0
`
` 1. No footnote shall exceed 5 lines. The Court strongly discourages
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`the use of extensive footnotes as a subterfuge to avoid page limitations in the Local
`
`Rules.
`
` 2. All footnotes shall be in the same type size as text. See Local Rule
`
`11−3.1.1.
`
` 3. Each case cited shall include a jump cite to the page or pages where
`
`the relevant authority appears (e.g., United States v. Doe, 500 U. S. 1, 14, 17
`
`(1997)).
`
`Failure to follow these requirements may result in rejection of a brief for
`
`correction.
`
`L. LEAD COUNSEL
`
` Lead counsel shall appear on all dispositive motions, scheduling
`
`conferences, and settlement conferences. The Court does not entertain special
`appearances; only counsel of record may appear.
`
` −7−
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG Document 13 Filed 06/15/17 Page 8 of 9 Page ID #:129
`M. COURTESY COPIES
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
` A courtesy copy of all electronically filed pleadings shall be delivered
`
`to Judge Selna’s courtesy copy drop on the tenth floor at the rear of the elevator
`
`lobby by noon the day following filing. Failure to make timely delivery of the
`
`courtesy copies may result in a delay in hearing a motion or ordering the
`
`matter off calendar.
`
`N. ELECTRONIC COPIES
`
`0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
` When the Court requires an electronic copy of a document (e.g., with
`
`proposed jury instructions), a copy shall be submitted at time of filing in one of the
`
`following manners: providing a copy on a disk, CD, or thumb drive in a labeled
`
`envelope and lodged with the clerk; or by e−mailing a copy to the Courtroom
`
`Deputy (JVS_Chambers@cacd.uscourts.gov). Regardless of media, the document
`
`should be formatted in WordPerfect9 or higher.
`
`O. WEBSITE
`
` Copies of this Order and other orders of this Court are available on the
`
`Central District of California’s website, at "www.cacd.uscourts.gov" at Judge
`
`Selna’s home page located under "Judge’s Procedures and Schedules."
`
`P. TENTATIVES−DAY OF HEARING AND WEB POSTING
`
` The Court attempts to issue tentative rulings on each motion. Tentatives
`
`will be posted on the Court’s website: www.cacd.uscourts.gov/. From the home
`
`page, click on “Judges’ Procedures and Schedules” in the left column. From the
`
` −8−
`
`
`
`Case 2:17-cv-04263-JVS-JCG Document 13 Filed 06/15/17 Page 9 of 9 Page ID #:130
`list click on "Hon. James V. Selna," which will take you to Judge Selna’s page.
`
`Click on the red notice in the upper left: "Click here to view Tentative Rulings."
`
`Then click on the desired ruling which comes up in a .pdf file which can be read
`
`with an Adobe Acrobat reader. Judge Selna attempts to post tentatives by late
`
`Friday afternoon preceding the hearing date. Hard copies of tentatives will also
`
`be available from the clerk approximately 15 minutes before the hearing.
`
` The Court thanks counsel and the parties for their anticipated
`
`cooperation.
`
`0
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`DATED: June 15, 2017
`
`James V. Selna
`United States District Judge
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
` −9−
`
`