PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE JURY DEMAND PAGE—1

Davor Rukavina, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24030781

Thomas D. Berghman, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24082683

Conor P. White, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24125722

500 N. Akard Street, Suite 4000

Dallas, Texas 75204

Telephone: (214) 855-7500

Facsimile: (214) 855-7584

COUNSEL FOR SCOTT M. SEIDEL, TRUSTEE

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

In re:

GOODMAN NETWORKS, INC.,

Debtor.

SCOTT M. SEIDEL, TRUSTEE;

GNET ATC, LLC; MULTIBAND

FIELD SERVICES, INC.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JAMES FRINZI; FRINZI FAMILY TRUST;

MULTIBAND GLOBAL RESOURCES, 

LLC,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Case No. 22-31641-mvl-7

(Chapter 7)

ADVERSARY PROCEEDING

NO: 23-03036

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE JURY DEMAND

TO THE HONORABLE MICHELLE V. LARSON, U.S. BANKRUPTCY JUDGE:

COMES NOW Scott M. Seidel (the “Trustee”), the duly-appointed chapter 7 trustee of 

Goodman Networks, Inc. (the “Debtor”), the debtor in the above-styled and numbered chapter 7 

bankruptcy case (the “Bankruptcy Case”), and, together with GNET ATC, LLC (“GNET ATC”) 

Case 23-03036-mvl Doc 39 Filed 12/15/23 Entered 12/15/23 16:19:27 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 4
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE JURY DEMAND PAGE—2

and Multiband Field Services, Inc. (“Multiband,” and with the Trustee and GNET ATC 

collectively, the “Plaintiffs”), the Plaintiffs in the above-styled and numbered adversary 

proceeding (the “Adversary Proceeding”), file this Motion to Strike Jury Demand (the “Motion”) 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) and respectfully request that this Court strike the 

Defendants’ Jury Demand (the “Jury Demand”) [Docket No. 31] filed by James Frinzi (“Frinzi”),

Frinzi Family Trust (“FFT”), and Multiband Global Resources (“MGR,” and together with Frinzi 

and FFT, the “Defendants”) and as incorporated in the Defendants’ Answer to Amended Complaint

(the “Defendants’ Answer”) [Docket No. 36]. In support of this Motion, the Plaintiffs respectfully 

state as follows:

1. The Court has jurisdiction over this Motion pursuant to 27 U.S.C. § 1334. Such 

jurisdiction is core under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2). To the extent that any matter in this Adversary 

Proceeding is not core, the Plaintiffs request that this Court recommend to the District Court by 

written report and recommendation that the District Court strike the Jury Demand.

2. Venue before this Court is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. 

3. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38, a jury demand may only be made 

no later than fourteen (14) days after the last pleading directed towards the issue is served. The 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint (the “Original Complaint”) [Docket No. 1] was filed on May 4, 

2023. In each of the Defendants’ timely answers to the Complaint, no jury demand was made. 

Only upon the Plaintiffs’ service of that certain Amended Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) 

[Docket No. 30], and contemporaneous with their Motion to Withdraw the Reference [Docket No. 

32], did the Defendants make their first jury demand under Rule 38. Because Fifth Circuit case 

law instructs that an amended complaint does not revive a previously waived right to demand a 

jury trial, and because the Amended Complaint raises no materially different issues than the 

Case 23-03036-mvl Doc 39 Filed 12/15/23 Entered 12/15/23 16:19:27 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 4
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE JURY DEMAND PAGE—3

Original Complaint, the Defendants have effectively waived their right to demand a jury trial under 

Rule 38. In support of this Motion, the Plaintiffs rely upon their contemporaneously filed Brief in 

Support of Motion to Strike Jury Demand.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Plaintiffs respectfully request that the 

Court enter an order (i) granting this Motion, (ii) striking the Jury Demand, (iii) striking the 

reincorporated jury demand asserted in the Defendants’ Answer, and (iv) providing the Plaintiffs 

such other and further relief to which they are entitled at law or in equity.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 15th day of December, 2023.

MUNSCH HARDT KOPF & HARR, P.C.

/s/ Conor P. White

Davor Rukavina, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24030781

Thomas D. Berghman, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24082683

Conor P. White, Esq.

Texas Bar No. 24125722

500 N. Akard Street, Suite 4000

Dallas, Texas 75201

Telephone: (214) 855-7500

Facsimile: (214) 855-7584

COUNSEL FOR SCOTT M. SEIDEL,

CHAPTER 7 TRUSTEE

Case 23-03036-mvl Doc 39 Filed 12/15/23 Entered 12/15/23 16:19:27 Desc Main

Document Page 3 of 4
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO STRIKE JURY DEMAND PAGE—4

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 14th day of December, 2023, he conferred 

with Paul Elkins, counsel for the Defendants, and that Mr. Elkins informed him that the 

Defendants were opposed to such relief.

/s/ Conor P. White

Conor P. White

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that on the 15th day of December, 2023, he caused true 

and correct copies of the foregoing document to be served via the Court’s CM/ECF system on all 

parties entitled to notice thereby and upon counsel of record for the Defendants, Jason M. Rudd, 

Jason.rudd@wickphillips.com; Scott D. Lawrence, scott.lawrence@wickphillips.com; Catherine 

A. Curtis, catherine.curtis@wickphillips.com; Mallory A. Davis, 

Mallory.davis@wickphillips.com; and Paul T. Elkins, paul.elkins@wickphillips.com, via email..

/s/ Conor P. White

Conor P. White

Case 23-03036-mvl Doc 39 Filed 12/15/23 Entered 12/15/23 16:19:27 Desc Main

Document Page 4 of 4