`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
`WESTERN DIVISION
`
`
`B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C.,
`
`
`
`
`
`CIV. A. NO. 2:12-cv-02834-JPM
`
`
`v.
`
`MATCH.COM L.L.C.
`
`PLAINTIFF,
`
`DEFENDANT.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANT MATCH.COM L.L.C.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF
`TIME TO RESPOND AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF
`Defendant, Match.com L.L.C., respectfully moves the Court for an extension of time for
`
`
`
`Match.com L.L.C. to respond to Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil
`
`Procedure 12(b)(6) and to Strike under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) (Dkt. 30), which
`
`Plaintiff filed on January 25, 2013.
`
`
`
`
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff’s motion seeks relief under both Rule 12(b) and Rule 12(f).
`
`2.
`
`Pursuant to Local Rule 12.1, a party opposing a motion to dismiss under Rule
`
`12(b) must file a response within 28 days. However, pursuant to Local Rule 7.2, a party
`
`opposing a motion to strike under Rule 12(f) must file a response within 14 days.
`
`
`
`3.
`
`In the interest of efficiency, People Media prefers to address all of the issues
`
`Plaintiff raised in its motion in a single response.
`
`
`
`4.
`
`Match.com L.L.C. therefore requests that the Court grant an extension of time to
`
`respond to the portion of Plaintiff’s motion seeking relief under Rule 12(f) such that the deadline
`
`for Match.com L.L.C.’s combined response is February 25, 2013.
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Match.com L.L.C. respectfully requests that the Court grant this motion
`
`and allow it up to and including February 25, 2013 in which to file a combined response to
`
`DEFENDANT MATCH.COM L.L.C.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION
`OF TIME TO RESPOND AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF
`
`
`
`
`PAGE 1
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02834-JPM-tmp Document 33 Filed 02/11/13 Page 2 of 3 PageID 350
`
`
`Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and Motion to Strike Under Fed. R.
`
`Civ. P. 12(f).
`
`Dated: February 11, 2013
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /s/ Steven G. Schortgen
`Steven G. Schortgen, pro hac vice
`
`Texas Bar No. 00794603
`steve.schortgen@klgates.com
`Jennifer Klein Ayers, pro hac vice
`Texas Bar No. 24069322
`jennifer.ayers@klgates.com
`K&L Gates LLP
`1717 Main Street, Suite 2800
`Dallas, TX 75201
`(214) 939-5500
`(214) 939-5849 Facsimile
`
`Sanjay K. Murthy, pro hac vice
`Illinois Bar No. 6279314
`sanjay.murthy@klgates.com
`Christopher E. Hanba, pro hac vice
`Illinois Bar No. 6298424
`christopher.hanba@klgates.com
`K&L Gates LLP
`70 W. Madison Street
`Suite 3100
`Chicago, Illinois 60602-4207
`(312) 372-1121
`(312) 827-8000 Facsimile
`
`Jonathan D. Rose (No. 20967)
`jrose@babc.com
`BRADLEY ARANT BOULT
`CUMMINGS LLP
`1600 Division Street, Suite 700
`Nashville, Tennessee 37203
`(615) 252-2308
`(615) 252-6308 Facsimile
`
`ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
`MATCH.COM L.L.C.
`
`DEFENDANT MATCH.COM L.L.C.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION
`OF TIME TO RESPOND AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF
`
`PAGE 2
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:12-cv-02834-JPM-tmp Document 33 Filed 02/11/13 Page 3 of 3 PageID 351
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION
`
`
`
`Pursuant to Local Rule 7.2(a)(1)(B), I certify that counsel for Defendant, Jon Rose,
`
`discussed the relief requested in this Motion with counsel for Plaintiff, Adam Simpson, on
`
`February 11, 2013. The consultation was successful, as Mr. Rose and Mr. Simpson were able to
`
`reach an agreement on the issues presented in the Motion. Adam Simpson advised that the
`
`Plaintiff consents to the relief sought in the Motion.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Steven G. Schortgen
`Steven G. Schortgen
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The foregoing document was filed on the Court’s CM/ECF system automatically
`
`effecting service on counsel of record for all other parties who have appeared in this action on
`
`the date of such service.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Steven G. Schortgen
`Steven G. Schortgen
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANT MATCH.COM L.L.C.’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION
`OF TIME TO RESPOND AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT THEREOF
`
`PAGE 3
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
