United States District Court, D. Nevada
COMPARTMENT IT2, LP, a Georgia limited partnership, COMPARTMENT IT5, LP, a Georgia limited partnership, COMPARTMENT IT9, LP, a Georgia limited partnership, and MFAM MOBILFUNK ASSET MANAGEMENT GMBH, a German corporation, Plaintiffs,
FIR TREE, INC. d/b/a FIR TREE PARTNERS, a New York Corporation, PAUL MCGINN, an individual, GABRIEL MARGENT, an individual, GRANT BARBER, an individual, JARRET COHEN, an individual, and SCOTT TROELLER, an individual, Defendants.
LAXAGUE, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 7417 JEFFREY D. PIKE, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 13934 ROGER A. LANE, ESQ. Massachusetts BBO
No. 551368 Foley & Lardner, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiffs
HOLLAND & HART, LLP J. STEPHEN PEEK, ESQ. (NV Bar No.
1758) ROBERT J. CASSITY, ESQ. (NV Bar No. 9779) LOWENSTEIN
SANDLER LLP SHELIA A. SADIGHI, ESQ. ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
FIR TREE, INC. D/B/A FIR TREE PARTNERS; JARRET COHEN; AND
ROTHSCHILD, LLP MARK J. CONNOT, ESQ. (NV BAR NO. 10010)
CORINNE MCCANN TRAINOR, ESQ. ALLISON L. HOLLOWS, ESQ.
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT PAUL MCGINN
FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. LESLIE BRYAN HART (NV Bar No. 4932)
MORRISON FOERSTER ERIK J. OLSON. ESQ. ATTORNEYS FOR
DEFENDANTS GABRIEL MARGENT AND GRANT BARBER
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: DEADLINES FOR OPPOSITIONS
TO MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND REPLIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS TO
DISMISS [SECOND REQUEST]
and all named Defendants herein, by and through their
attorneys of record, stipulate as follows:
three motions to dismiss that are the subjects of this
stipulation were filed on August 4, 2017; namely, Defendants
Fir Tree, Inc., Jarret Cohen, and Scott J. Troeller's
Motion to Dismiss (ECF No.12 and, as corrected, ECF No. 19);
Defendants Gabriel Margent and Grant Barber's Motion to
Dismiss (ECF No. 16); and Defendant Paul McGinn's Motion
to Dismiss (ECF No. 9).
of the Motions to Dismiss is accompanied by a Memorandum of
Points and Authorities, which range in length from 18 to 23
pages, as well as accompanying declarations and exhibits
which, taken together, exceed 1, 200 pages. See, as
to the Fir Tree Defendants, ECF Nos. 13, 14 & 15 and, as
corrected, 20, 21 & 22; as to Defendant McGinn, ECF No.
10; and as to Defendants Barber and Margent, the attachments
to ECF No. 16. In addition, Defendants Barber and Margent
filed a Request for Judicial Notice in support of their
Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 17).
Given the extensive nature of the three Motions to Dismiss
and the materials submitted in support of them,
Plaintiffs' counsel seeks an extension of time in order
to respond adequately to the Motions to Dismiss, and to
provide Defendants' counsel with adequate time to reply,
to which the Defendants' respective counsel have
July 31, 2017, the parties submitted a “Stipulation and
Order re: Deadlines for Responses to Complaint and Related
Matters” (the “First Stipulation, ” ECF No.
7). The First Stipulation requested a deadline for Answers to
the Complaint and Motions to Dismiss of August 4, 2017, a
deadline for oppositions to motions to dismiss of September
18, 2017, and a deadline for replies in support of motions to
dismiss of October 13, 2017.
August 3, 2017, the Court entered its Order setting a
deadline of August 4, 2017 for answers or other responses to
the Complaint (ECF No. 8).
August 4, 2017, as discussed above, the three Motions to
Dismiss, together with their respective supporting materials,
parties remain in agreement regarding their requested
briefing schedule for all filed Motions to Dismiss and
therefore renew the request set forth in the First
Stipulation for deadlines of September 18, 2017, for the
oppositions to each filed Motion to Dismiss and October 13,
2017, for replies in support of each filed Motion to Dismiss.