Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00638/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00638-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28:1338pt Patent Infringement

---

1

11cv638-JAH (KSC)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DR. GREENS, INC., a California 

Corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

SPECTRUM LABORATORIES, LLC, an 

Ohio limited liability company,

Defendant.

Case No.: 11cv638-JAH (KSC)

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

ATTORNEY GARY EASTMAN’S EX 

PARTE APPLICATION (Doc. No. 

368).

SPECTRUM LABORATORIES, LLC, an 

Ohio limited liability company,

Counter-Plaintiff,

v.

DR. GREENS, INC., a California 

Corporation,

Counter-Defendant.

//

//

//

Case 3:11-cv-00638-JAH-KSC Document 370 Filed 01/31/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 4
2

11cv638-JAH (KSC)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

On January 21, 2020, Counter-Plaintiff Spectrum Laboratories, LLC, (“Spectrum”)

filed a motion requesting the Court issue an Order to Show Cause against CounterDefendants Dr. Greens, Inc., Matthew Robert Green (collectively, “Counter-Defendants”), 

and their trial counsel, Gary Eastman. Doc. No. 366. The motion was granted on January 

29, 2020. Doc. No. 367. The Parties were Ordered to appear before the Court on February 

7, 2020, and file a pleading addressing the assertions that the Parties violated the Court’s 

February 23, 2018, Order barring Dr. Greens and Matthew Green “from transferring any 

accounts held by Dr. Greens... [other than] routine business expenses that [Mr. Green] has 

been paying to keep [his] business going... until further Order of the Court.” Doc. Nos. 

334, at 8-9; 367. Additionally, the Court Ordered Counter-Defendants and attorney Gary 

Eastman, “their agents and assigns, [to] preserve all assets, excluding identified assets 

needed for day to day operational expenses, in which [the Parties] hold an interest, directly 

or indirectly, including but not limited to all personal investment accounts and personal 

bank accounts, all business investment accounts, business bank accounts. . . until further 

Order of this Court.” Doc. No. 367, at 2-3.

On January 30, 2020, counsel for attorney Gary Eastman filed an ex parte application 

requesting the Court vacate the order to show cause and reinstate Spectrum’s motion for 

briefing and hearing in due course. Doc. No. 368, at 5. Alternatively, the ex parte

application requests a modification of the hearing and briefing schedule set forth in the 

Order to Show Cause in order to allow for attorney Gary Eastman and his new counsel 

additional time, arguing that a failure to provide additional time would result in substantial 

prejudice “if put to the task of mounting an expedited defense in a matter of days.” Id.

Specifically, the application asserts that “[they] cannot assimilate the facts; gather and 

compile the relevant documents and evidence; complete its legal research; and draft a 

meaningful and complete written opposition to either the Motion or the OSC” in the time 

allotted by the Court. Id. at 3. As such, the application asserts that due process 

considerations entitles Mr. Eastman adequate notice and a meaningful opportunity to 

respond. Id. at 3 (citing Int’l Union v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821, 927 (1994)).

Case 3:11-cv-00638-JAH-KSC Document 370 Filed 01/31/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 4
3

11cv638-JAH (KSC)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Spectrum filed an opposition to the ex parte application on January 31, 2020. Doc. 

No. 369. Therein, Spectrum argues granting of the application would result in prejudice, 

as “Spectrum is very concerned about what could happen to the assets with another delay.” 

Id. at 4-5. Additionally, Spectrum asserts that attorney Gary Eastman will not be suffer any 

violations of his due process rights, since the Court is providing both adequate notice and 

an opportunity to be heard. Id. at 3. Spectrum also asserts that in anticipation of the 

February 7, 2020, hearing date, “counsel for Spectrum. . . have prioritized preparations for

responding to briefing and the hearing, including booking nonrefundable flights and

prepaid hotels, totaling over one thousand dollars. Any delays would prejudice Spectrum 

and its counsel and cost significant money to Spectrum.” Id. at 5.

While all requisite due process considerations—specifically notice and an 

opportunity to be heard—are satisfied by the current schedule set out in the Order to Show 

Cause, after careful consideration of the Parties’ pleadings, the Court finds it appropriate

to alter the briefing schedule and reset the Order to Show Cause hearing. See United States 

v. Ayres, 166 F.3d 991, 995 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[C]ivil contempt may be imposed in an 

ordinary civil proceeding upon notice and an opportunity to be heard.). Despite attorney 

Gary Eastman’s representations that that “Spectrum’s charges... are factually and legally 

infirm[,]” the allegations are particularly troubling, therefore, the ex parte application by 

attorney Gary Eastman is only GRANTED in part to allow the Parties additional time to 

submit their responses to the allegations in Spectrum’s pleading and the Court’s Order. 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The Order to Show Cause scheduled for February 7, 2020, at 11:30 am, and 

related briefing schedule, is VACATED.

2. Counter-Defendants and attorney Gary Eastman are to file a Response to the 

Order to Show Cause by February 14, 2020.

3. If Spectrum wishes to reply to the Response, they must do so by February 

18, 2020.

Case 3:11-cv-00638-JAH-KSC Document 370 Filed 01/31/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 4
4

11cv638-JAH (KSC)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4. The Order to Show Cause hearing is rescheduled for February 20, 2020, at 

10:30 a.m.

5. The Court’s Order to Show Cause, (doc. no. 367), shall, in all other respects, 

remain the same, specifically including the order to preserve all assets.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 31, 2020

 

_________________________________

JOHN A. HOUSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-00638-JAH-KSC Document 370 Filed 01/31/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 4