07 13 2011 07 13 2011 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
 

) 

In the Matter of ) 

) 

UNIVERSAL COMPUTERS AND )

 ELECTRONICS, INC., ) 

d/b/a Appliancebestbuys.com, and, ) DOCKET NO. 9347 

d/b/a universallcdtv.com, )

 Respondent. ) PUBLIC DOCUMENT 

)

 ) 

JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR RESPONDENT TO RESPOND TO 

INTERROGATORIES AND DOCUMENT REQUESTS AND TO AMEND 

SCHEDULING ORDER 

By this motion, Complaint Counsel and Respondent jointly move the Court for an order 

extending Respondent’s deadline to respond to Interrogatories and Document Requests and 

provide its initial disclosures and preliminary witness list to July 19, 2011. Additionally, 

Complaint Counsel and Respondent jointly move the Court to amend the May 12, 2011 

Scheduling Order to allow Complaint Counsel to issue document requests and interrogatories 

until July 29, 2011. This is the first amendment to the Scheduling Order the parties have sought. 

If approved, the changes would not affect the date for the Commencement of the Hearing on 

December 1, 2011. 

On June 2, 2011, Complaint Counsel served its First Request for Production of 

Documents (“Document Requests”) and First Set of Interrogatories (“Interrogatories”) on 

Respondent. Pursuant to Commission Rule of Practice 3.35, Respondent had until July 5, 2011 

– 30 days from the date of service – to serve its answers and objections, if any. Respondent has 

not provided any responses to the Document Requests or Interrogatories. In addition, pursuant 
to Commission Rule of Practice 3.31(b), within five (5) days of filing its Answer (filed on April 

29, 2011), Respondent should have provided Complaint Counsel with mandatory Initial 

Disclosures. Further, pursuant to the May 12, 2011 Scheduling Order, Respondent was required 

to serve Complaint Counsel with its preliminary witness list and a summary of the proposed 

testimony no later than June 22, 2011. Respondent did not provide either of these documents. 

After conferring with Respondent’s counsel, and subject to the approval of the Court, 

Complaint Counsel has agreed to extend Respondent’s deadline to July 19, 2011 for responding 

to its written discovery and providing initial disclosures and an initial witness list. However, this 

extended deadline of July 19, 2011 occurs after the Scheduling Order’s deadline for serving 

written discovery of July 15, 2011. Accordingly, to ensure that Complaint Counsel would have 

the ability to serve any additional Document Requests or Interrogatories based on Respondent’s 

responses, Respondent and Complaint Counsel jointly move to amend the Scheduling Order to 

allow Complaint Counsel to issue Interrogatories and Document Requests through and including 

July 29, 2011. 

Commission Rule of Practice 3.21(c)(2) provides that “[t]he Administrative Law Judge 

may, upon a showing of good cause, grant a motion to extend any deadline or time specified in 

this scheduling order other than the date of the evidentiary hearing.” Allowing Complaint 

Counsel to issue additional Document Requests and Interrogatories for ten (10) days following 

receipt of Respondent’s discovery responses would remove any prejudice from Respondent’s 

failure to comply with its initial deadlines. The proposed change would not affect any other 

deadlines prescribed by the Scheduling Order, including the deadline for the close of discovery 

on August 23, 2011 and the Commencement of Hearing on December 1, 2011. 

2
 
FROM :LAW OFFICES FAX NO. :2125664780 Jul. 13 2011 03:03PM P2 

The parties are prepared to discuss this joint motion with the Court at its tequest. A 

Pl'<.,po.ed order is attached. 

Respectfully submitted, 

:-L-au----,'F:S?c'"'·h"""'n'" .c.Aid"e...!,· 

Matthew Wilshire 

Division of Enforcement/Bureau of Consumer Protection 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Avelllle, N.W. MeR1 02B 

Wa.hington, D.C. 205HO 

(202) 326·2604 

Ischlicider(W,tlc.gov 

Illwilshirg.@[).&.gQY 

Complain! COUIl~el 

Dated: July 13, 20 II 

=-:-:H1:t':-:~"-o-----;-=-­ Rlc S. Neuharth, Esq. 

277 roadway, Suite 408 

Ne York, New York 1.0007 

(646) 263-1948 

jurispitaCdlaol.cQm 

Attorney for Respondent 

3 

FROM :LAW OFFICES FAX NO. :2125664780 J~l. 13 2011 02:45PM P2 

STATEMENTgF THE PARTIES ~WGARDIN-<;] MEET AND CONFER 

hl acoordance with Paragrapb 4 of the Cow'I's May 12, ZO 'II Schcdullllg Ol'der, the 

undersigned counsel certify that Complaint Counsel and Respondent conferred in good .Faith and 

arc in agreement reg'<utting '!lIe issues raised by the Joitl! Motion to Ext.end Time for Respondent 

to Respond to I.nterrogatories and nocum~n1. Requests and to Amend Scheduling Order. On July 

12,2011, at 12;09 p.m., Complaint Counsel Lama Schnclder and Matthew Wilshire bad a 

telephone conference with Richard Neubarth, counsel for RespoJ.'ldents, wherein we diRcu"sed 

!.hi" joint motion and stipulation and agreed to prcpat·o • joint motion lind propos~d ordcl'. 

Division of En ForoementiBureau ofConsmner PrOlection 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pcnllsylvania Avenue, N.W, M-8102B 

Washingwll, D.C. '2.05RO 

(202) 3:26-2604 

IBchncidcl·«(,it)c.gq,y' 

mwilshir9(aif'tc.J.lov 

Comp1:lint Connsel 

Dated: July 13, 2011. 

~ Richaru S. Neuharth, EHq. 

'2.77 BJ'Oadwny, Suite 408 

New York, New York 10007 

(646) 263-1948 


jurispllfl,(dlao),com 


Attorney for Respondent 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this 13th day ofJuly, 2011, I filed and served the Joint Motion to 

Extend Time for Respondent to Respond to Interrogatories and Document Requests and to 


Amend Scheduling Order upon the following as set forth below: 


One electronic copy via the FTC E-Filing System to: 


Donald S. Clark, Secretary Federal Trade Commission 600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Room H159 Washington, DC 20580 


One paper copy via hand delivery and one electronic copy via email to: 


The Honorable D. Michael Chappell Administrative Law Judge 600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., 


Room H-110 Washington, DC 20580 Email: oalj@ftc.gov 


One electronic copy via email to: 


Richard S. Neubarth, Esq. 


277 Broadway, Suite 408 

New York, New York 10007 

(646) 263-1948 

jurispita@aol.com 

Attorney for Respondent 

adlnin@appiiancebestbuys.com 

Respondent 

Laura 

Federal Trade Commission 
 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
 

) 

In the Matter of ) 

) 

UNIVERSAL COMPUTERS AND )

 ELECTRONICS, INC., ) 

d/b/a Appliancebestbuys.com, and, ) DOCKET NO. 9347 

d/b/a universallcdtv.com, )

 Respondent. ) 

)

 ) 

[proposed] ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR 

RESPONDENT TO RESPOND TO INTERROGATORIES AND DOCUMENT 

REQUESTS AND TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER 

On July 13, 2011, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Extend Time for Respondent to 

Respond to Interrogatories and Document Requests and to provide initial disclosures and a 

preliminary witness list, and to Amend the Scheduling Order issued in this case on May 12, 

2011. Specifically, the parties jointly request an extension of Respondent’s deadline to respond 

to Complaint Counsel’s First Request for Production of Documents and First Set of 

Interrogatories to July 19, 2011. The parties further jointly request an extension of Respondent’s 

deadline to provide Complaint Counsel with Initial Disclosures and Respondent’s preliminary 

witness list to July 19, 2011. The parties further jointly request an amendment to the Scheduling 

Order to give Complaint Counsel until July 29, 2011 to propound additional discovery related to 

Respondent’s responses to Document Requests and Interrogatories, and the initial disclosures 

and preliminary witness list. The parties further state that each party believes it will not be 

prejudiced by this limited extension of the discovery deadline. 

Commission Rule of Practice 3.21(c)(2) provides that “[t]he Administrative Law Judge 

1
 
 

may, upon a showing of good cause, grant a motion to extend any deadline or time specified in 

this scheduling order other than the date of the evidentiary hearing.” 16 C.F.R. § 3.21(c)(2). 

Based on the statements of the parties in their Joint Motion, and the fact that the proposed 

change will not affect any other deadlines in the Scheduling Order, there is good cause to amend 

the Scheduling Order as requested by the parties. 

Accordingly, the Joint Motion to Amend Scheduling Order is GRANTED and it is 

hereby ORDERED that the Scheduling Order dated May 12, 2011 is amended as follows: 

1.	 Respondent shall provide any responses to Complaint Counsel’s First Request for 

Production of Documents and First Set of Interrogatories on or before July 19, 2011. 

2.	 Respondent shall provide Initial Disclosures pursuant to Commission Rule of Practice 

3.31(b) and Respondent’s preliminary witness list and a summary of the proposed 

testimony on or before July 19, 2011. 

3.	 Complaint Counsel may issue any additional Requests for Production of Documents or 

Interrogatories based on Respondent’s responses and production of documents described 

in paragraphs 1 and 2 above on or before July 29, 2011. 

4.	 The remaining dates and all additional provisions in the May 12, 2011 Scheduling Order 

remain in effect. 

SO ORDERED: 

The Honorable D. Michael Chappell 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

DATE: 

2