Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04029/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-04029-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection 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

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Ruth A. Harvey

Assistant Director

E. Kathleen Shahan

John Siemietkowski

Frances M. McLaughlin

Trial Attorneys

Commercial Litigation Branch

Civil Division

P.O. Box 875

Ben Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044-0875

Tele: (202) 307-0249; Fax: (202) 307-0494

Kathie.Shahan@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) CASE NO. CV-09-04029 MHP

)

Plaintiff, ) MOTION FOR 

) MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF

v. ) UNDER LOCAL RULE 7-11

) OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE,

GONZALES & GONZALES BONDS ) MOTION TO ENLARGE TIME

AND INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., and ) TO FILE RESPONSIVE 

AMERICAN SURETY COMPANY, INC., ) PLEADING UNDER LOCAL

) RULE 6-3;

Defendants. ) DECLARATION OF E. 

 ) KATHLEEN SHAHAN; 

) PROPOSED ORDER

) 

GONZALES & GONZALES BONDS )

AND INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., and )

AMERICAN SURETY COMPANY, INC., )

)

)

Counterplaintiffs, )

)

v. )

)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT )

OF HOMELAND SECURITY, JANET )

NAPOLITANO, in her capacity as SECRETARY )

OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT )

OF HOMELAND SECURITY, )

)

Counterdefendants. )

 )

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief/Enlargement; Proposed Order 

CV-09-04029

Case 3:09-cv-04029-EMC Document 24 Filed 01/06/10 Page 1 of 7
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

INTRODUCTION AND RELIEF REQUESTED

The United States’ August 28, 2009 Complaint is to enforce final agency action and the

Defendants’ October 22, 2009 Counterclaim is for review of final agency action. The

Counterclaim is subject to a FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(1) and (6) motion to dismiss for lack of

subject-matter jurisdiction and failure to state a cause of action. FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b) provides

that a motion asserting any of the Rule 12(b) defenses “must be made before pleading if a

responsive pleading is allowed.” FED. R. CIV. P. 12(a) requires that a responsive pleading by the

United States must be filed within 60 days of service. Thus, the United States must file its Rule

12(b) motion to dismiss by December 21, 2009. The Court’s Standing Order, paragraph 4, states

that no motion to dismiss may be filed before the initial case management conference except by

leave of court. The case management conference is scheduled for January 11, 2010. Thus, in

order to comply with FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b), the United States seeks leave of Court to file its Rule

12(b) motion to dismiss by December 21, 2009. If the Court does not grant leave to file a

motion to dismiss prior to the case management conference, the United States would be required

to file an answer in lieu of a responsive pleading. Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b), certain

defenses are waived if not asserted prior to filing a answer. Thus, the United States’ ability to

pursue its claim and defend the Counterclaim would be significantly prejudiced.

The United States does not need more time to file its responsive pleading/motion to

dismiss and is prepared to file its response to the Counterclaim within the time set by FED. R.

CIV. P. 12(a), to wit: December 21, 2009. If the Court is not inclined to permit the government to

file its responsive pleading/motion to dismiss by the deadline set by the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, however, the United States seeks, in the alternative, a 29 day enlargement of time to

file its responsive pleading/motion to dismiss until after the January 11, 2010 case management

conference, or until January 19, 2010. The United States seeks this enlargement to enable it to

comply with FED. R. CIV. P. 12(a) and (b) and Standing Order 7-11, by filing its responsive

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief/Enlargement; Proposed Order 

CV-09-04029 2

Case 3:09-cv-04029-EMC Document 24 Filed 01/06/10 Page 2 of 7
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

pleading after the case management conference on January 11, 2010.

CONCLUSION

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-11, Plaintiff and Counter-defendants United States respectfully

request that the Court grant this motion and enter the attached order granting leave to file its Rule

12(b) motion to dismiss prior to the case management conference. In the alternative, we

respectfully request that the Court enlarge our time to file a responsive pleading pursuant to FED.

R. CIV. P. 12(b) until January 19, 2010, and grant the alternative order.

Respectfully submitted,

TONY WEST

Assistant Attorney General

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO

United States Attorney

 /s/ E. Kathleen Shahan 

J. CHRISTOPHER KOHN

RUTH A. HARVEY

E. KATHLEEN SHAHAN (D.C. Bar No.267872)

JOHN SIEMIETKOWSKI (PA Bar. No. 50346)

FRANCES M. MCLAUGHLIN (FL Bar No.

0256640)

Attorneys, Trial Civil Division

U.S. Department of Justice

Commercial Litigation Branch

P.O. Box 875

Ben Franklin Station

Washington, DC 20044-0875

Tel: (202) 307-0249

Fax: (202) 307-0494

Dated: December 14, 2009 Attorneys for the United States of America

DECLARATION OF E. KATHLEEN SHAHAN

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I, E. KATHLEEN SHAHAN, declare:

1 I am a trial attorney for the United States Department of Justice, Civil Division. I am

licensed to practice law in the District of Columbia and to appear before this Court. I am

one of the counsel of record in the captioned matter and I am familiar with the pleadings in

this action. I make this declaration from my own personal knowledge.

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief/Enlargement; Proposed Order 

CV-09-04029 3

Case 3:09-cv-04029-EMC Document 24 Filed 01/06/10 Page 3 of 7
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. On December 14, 2009, I called Gary Nye, defendants and counter-claimants’ counsel

requesting, among other items, (1) a stipulation that defendants and counter-claimants had

no objection to this Court granting our motion for leave to file a motion to dismiss or, (2),

in the alternative, stipulation that defendants and counter-claimants had no objection to a

29 day enlargement of time to file a responsive pleading one week after the January 11,

2010 case management conference. 

3. Mr. Nye responded that he had no objection to our request for leave to file our motion to

dismiss or to our motion for an enlargement of time provided that we would agree to

continue the hearing date on the government’s motion for summary judgment, currently

scheduled for January 25, 2010, until March 1, 2010. While we were amenable to a two

week extension of time, our clients believed that a five week extension was too long

especially since the motion for summary judgment was filed on November 18, 2009. As

our client would not agree to such a long extension, we were not able to reach a

stipulation. 

4. The United States requests the alternative relief of an enlargement of time to filed its

responsive pleading so that it can comply with FED. R. CIV. P. 12(a) and (b) and Standing

Order 7-11, by filing its responsive pleading after the case management conference on

January 11, 2010.

5. As stated above, the parties were unable to reach a stipulation on this and other matters.

6. If the Court does not grant leave to file a motion to dismiss prior to the case management

conference, without an enlargement of time, the United States would be required to file an

answer in lieu of a responsive pleading. Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b), certain defenses

are waived if not asserted prior to filing a answer. Thus, the United States’ ability to

pursue its claim and defend the Counterclaim would be significantly prejudiced.

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief/Enlargement; Proposed Order 

CV-09-04029 4

Case 3:09-cv-04029-EMC Document 24 Filed 01/06/10 Page 4 of 7
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

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and accurate and that I have

executed this declaration on December 14, 2009, in Washington, District of Columbia.

_/s/_E. Kathleen Shahan_______

E. KATHLEEN SHAHAN

Attorney for the United States

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief/Enlargement; Proposed Order 

CV-09-04029 5

Case 3:09-cv-04029-EMC Document 24 Filed 01/06/10 Page 5 of 7
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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have, on this 14th day of December 2009, electronically filed the

United States’ Motion for Miscellaneous Relief Under Local Rule 7-11 or in the Alternative,

Motion to Enlarge Time to File a Responsive Pleading Under Local Rule 6-3, and Proposed Order

by using the CM/ECF system which will send notice of electronic filing to all counsel of record

who have consented to electronic notification and have served a copy by fascimile on Gary A.

Nye, Roxborough, Pomerance, Nye & Adreani, LLP, 5820 Canoga Avenue, Suite 250, Woodland

Hills, California 91367 (818) 992-9991. 

 /s/ E. Kathleen Shahan 

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief/Enlargement; Proposed Order 

CV-09-04029 6

Case 3:09-cv-04029-EMC Document 24 Filed 01/06/10 Page 6 of 7
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

(PROPOSED) ORDER

For good cause shown, the Court hereby grants leave to the United States to file its

responsive pleading/motion to dismiss prior to the case management conference, or the Court

grants the United States an enlargement of time to file its responsive motion by January 19, 2010. 

SO ORDERED

Dated: December ___, 2009 __________________________________

Hon. MARILYN HALL PATEL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Motion for Miscellaneous Relief/Enlargement; Proposed Order 

CV-09-04029 7

January 5, 2010

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:09-cv-04029-EMC Document 24 Filed 01/06/10 Page 7 of 7