Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02164/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02164-24/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 850
Nature of Suit: Securities, Commodities, Exchange
Cause of Action: 15:0077 Securities Fraud

---

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 3:12-cv-2164-GPC-JMA

ORDER:

(1) ADOPTING RECEIVER’S

RECOMMENDATION

REGARDING JAMUL VALLEY

PROPERTY;

(2) SEALING RECEIVER’S

RECOMMENDATION

REGARDING JAMUL VALLEY

PROPERTY

[ECF No. 1020]

[REDACTED]

v.

LOUIS V. SCHOOLER and FIRST

FINANCIAL PLANNING

CORPORATION, dba Western

Financial Planning Corporation,

Defendants.

Before the Court is Receiver Thomas C. Hebrank’s (the “Receiver”) Update as

to Status of Balloting Regarding Letter of Intent for Jamul Valley Property and

Recommendation for Further Action. (ECF No. 1020.) Previously, the Receiver had

received a letter of intent regarding the Jamul Valley property, owned by the Jamul

Meadows, Lyons Valley, and Hidden Hills GPs, and the Court ordered the Receiver to

ballot the investors in those GPs. (ECF No. 992.) All three GPs obtained a quorum of

eligible voters (i.e. investors who have not defaulted on their notes owed to the GP or

their operational bills) for either selling or retaining the property. (ECF No. 1020, at

- 1 - 3:12-cv-2164-GPC-JMA

Case 3:12-cv-02164-GPC-LL Document 1088 Filed 06/17/15 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
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

1.) A majority of eligible voting interests in Lyons Valley voted to retain the property.

(ECF No. 1020, Ex. A.) Neither Jamul Meadows nor Hidden Hills had a majority either

to sell the property orto retain it. (Id.) However, Hidden Hills had more voting interests

in favor of selling and Jamul Meadows had more voting interests in favor of retaining.

(Id.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- 2 - 3:12-cv-2164-GPC-JMA

Case 3:12-cv-02164-GPC-LL Document 1088 Filed 06/17/15 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
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

The Court further notes that this information regarding the status of the Jamul

Valley property GPs warrants sealing. Generally, “compelling reasons” must exist to

seal documents filed in support of a dispositive motion. See Kamakana v. City and

Cnty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–79 (9th Cir. 2006). Where a court filing

contains “business information that might harm a litigant’s competitive standing,” the

court may properly deny public access. Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, 435 U.S. 589, 598

(1978). This information could hinder the Receiver’s ability to negotiate and sell the

property for the GPs and thusthe Court concludes that compelling reasons exist to seal

this order as well asthe Receiver’s recommendation, (ECF No. 1020). Accordingly, the

Clerk of Court is directed to seal the document currently filed at ECF No. 1020.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 17, 2015

HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL

United States District Judge

- 3 - 3:12-cv-2164-GPC-JMA

Case 3:12-cv-02164-GPC-LL Document 1088 Filed 06/17/15 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3