Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00772/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00772-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act

---

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

cal 

1 07cv0772

 

 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION

TO ENFORCE ADMINISTRATIVE

SUBPOENAS OF

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL NICITA and EDWARD

LEONARD,

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil No.07CV0772 WQH (AJB)

Order Denying Ex Parte Application for

Order Extending Time for Hearing

[Doc. No. 20]

 Respondents’ filed an ex parte application requesting an extension of time for the hearing set for

January 11, 2008 and the December 28, 2007 deadline for producing a revised privilege log and sworn

affidavits. Respondents’ seek to continue the January 11, 2008 hearing until March 4, 2008 or later on

the grounds that Respondent Nicita has a medical condition that will make him unavailable for any type

of work for approximately nine weeks beginning December 18, 2007.

The Petitioner argues, that while they are not unsympathetic to Mr. Nicita’s medical condition,

his treatment does not begin until nearly four weeks after the Court issued the November 21, 2007 Order

setting the above deadlines and hearing date. As such, the Petitioner contends that the Respondent has

Case 3:07-cv-00772-WQH-AJB Document 25 Filed 12/20/07 Page 1 of 2
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

2 07cv0772

ample time during the interim four weeks to assist his counsel in preparation for the hearing. The Court

agrees. Additionally, Mr. Nicita may exercise the option provided by the Petitioner’s of submitting an

affidavit in lieu of appearing at the January 11, 2007 hearing or may appear at said hearing telephonically. 

The Petitioner also challenges Mr. Nicita’s request for additional time to file affidavits establishing the existence of a joint defense agreement (“JDA”) arguing that there is little if any need for Mr.

Nicita’s involvement in such efforts since it was Respondents’ respective counsel who were involved in

negotiating the JDA. The Petitioner argues that obtaining the affidavits should be as simple as having

Respondents’ counsel send draft affidavits to those parties alleged to have participated in the JDA. The

Court agrees, finding considerable merit to Petitioner’s arguments, particularly in light of the fact that

Mr. Leonard has provided no reason for his apparent need for additional time. 

Furthermore, since the Court finds Petitioner’s request for equitable tolling inappropriate,

Respondents’ requested extension would impose considerable prejudice upon Petitioner’s ability to bring

an action against Respondents for enforcement of any civil fine, penalty or forfeiture, pecuniary or

otherwise, with in the statute of limitations period set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2462. As such, and for the

reasons set forth above, Respondents’ ex parte application for an extension of time is hereby DENIED

and the deadlines and hearing date shall remain as set by this Court’s November 21, 2007 Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: December 20, 2007

Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia

U.S. Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

Case 3:07-cv-00772-WQH-AJB Document 25 Filed 12/20/07 Page 2 of 2