1- PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE MEMORANDUM 

IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

FOR MEDICAL CONTINUANCE

LEGAL125226833.2 

Perkins Coie LLP

1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor 

Portland, OR 97209-4128 

Phone: 503.727.2000 

Fax: 503.727.2222 

Erick J. Haynie, OSB No. 982482 

EHaynie@perkinscoie.com 

Gabrielle D. Richards, OSB No. 114992 

GRichards@perkinscoie.com 

PERKINS COIE LLP

1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor 

Portland, OR 97209-4128 

Telephone: 503.727.2000 

Facsimile: 503.727.2222 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

LNV Corporation 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

LNV CORPORATION, a Nevada 

corporation, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DENISE SUBRAMANIAM, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 3:14-cv-01836-MO 

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE 

MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION 

TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

FOR MEDICAL CONTINUANCE 

Plaintiff LNV Corporation (“LNV”) hereby responds to the Motion for Medical 

Continuance filed by defendant Denise Subramaniam (“Defendant”). For the reasons set forth 

below, LNV opposes Defendant’s motion for a 120-day continuance of all deadlines in this case 

and requests that the Court deny Defendant’s motion or, at minimum, evaluate the factual basis 

for Defendant’s request prior to the entry of an order granting any extension. 

Case 3:14-cv-01836-MO Document 25 Filed 03/04/15 Page 1 of 5
 

 2- PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE MEMORANDUM 

IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

FOR MEDICAL CONTINUANCE

LEGAL125226833.2 

Perkins Coie LLP

1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor 

Portland, OR 97209-4128 

Phone: 503.727.2000 

Fax: 503.727.2222 

DISCUSSION 

Defendant has moved the Court for an order that extends all deadlines in this case for 120 

days, citing medical difficulties. This is the latest in a series of last-minute extension requests by 

the Defendant. Distressingly, in making the present request, she makes inaccurate statements to 

the Court that raise questions as to the legitimacy of the request. 

Defendant already has been granted three extensions of time in this case — LNV twice 

stipulated to extend the time for Defendant to file a responsive pleading and also stipulated to 

extend the deadline for completion of discovery and filing of dispositive motions. 

Unfortunately, Defendant’s latest request, coming on the eve of her current deadline to file a 

responsive pleading, leads to concern about the pattern of delay that has developed in this case. 

Further concerns exist as to the justification for Defendant’s newest motion, including 

evidentiary support, and LNV is troubled by misstatements of fact in Defendant’s motion. 

For example, Defendant suggests that the previous stipulated motions were entered into 

by LNV as an accommodation for Defendant’s medical condition. This is not true. LNV 

previously stipulated to extend the time for Defendant to file a responsive pleading and to extend 

the deadline for completion of discovery and filing of dispositive motions as a courtesy to 

Defendant, who is appearing pro se. LNV neither reviewed nor considered any medical records 

purportedly provided by Defendant when considering her requests for extensions of time. In 

fact, in requesting an extension of time to file a responsive pleading, Defendant told counsel for 

LNV that she had suffered a computer failure and would not be able to timely file her answer.1

Further concern arises from the fact that, in both prior instances where Defendant has 

requested an extension of time to file a pleading, the request has come on the eve of a deadline. 

Previously, counsel for LNV has promptly responded to Defendant, even agreeing to draft and 

file each stipulated motion based on Defendant’s representation that she would become a 

 1

 Defendant also indicates that her “response to LNV’s response to her response to 

LNV’s complaint” was due on March 3. LNV assumes that Defendant is referencing her reply in 

support of her motion for judicial notice, which was actually due on March 2. 

Case 3:14-cv-01836-MO Document 25 Filed 03/04/15 Page 2 of 5
 

 3- PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE MEMORANDUM 

IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

FOR MEDICAL CONTINUANCE

LEGAL125226833.2 

Perkins Coie LLP

1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor 

Portland, OR 97209-4128 

Phone: 503.727.2000 

Fax: 503.727.2222 

registered user of the Court’s electronic filing system.2 To date, Defendant has not fulfilled her 

promise to do so. 

The pattern of delay is problematic. Further, Defendant’s motion provides no assurance 

that, even if a 120-day extension is granted, Defendant will not continue with delay tactics later, 

including a new request on the eve of any extension the Court may grant. 

This is a straightforward judicial foreclosure case. Defendant has not made a payment on 

the loan in years and the loan was accelerated in 2012. The material facts underlying the 

foreclosure are not at issue, continued delays make little sense and this pattern of delay has no 

legitimate justification. 

Equally as troubling is Defendant’s evidentiary support for her most recent motion. 

Defendant states that “spinal surgery is recommended” but provides no date for her surgery nor 

any indication that surgery is imminent. Moreover, the awkward wording of Defendant’s only 

proffered evidence, a purported letter from her doctor, itself raises concerns regarding 

authenticity. The letter, addressed to Defendant, states that the doctor writes to “advise you 

[presumably, the addressee, Defendant] the above named patient is currently under my care.” Is 

the doctor advising Defendant herself that she is under his care? That presumably would be selfevident. Combined with the lack of logo office letterhead, this raises questions as to the letter’s 

authenticity. At minimum, the letter offered as Exhibit A is hearsay and unsupported by a 

physician affidavit, and LNV should be afforded the opportunity to ascertain that it is genuine, 

particularly since the doctor’s office did not submit an affidavit. 

// 

 2

 Defendant called counsel for LNV on March 2 and also sent an email. Counsel for 

LNV was out of the office on March 2 but sent a letter via email and U.S. mail to Defendant on 

March 3 indicating that LNV would oppose any motion for an extension of time. 

Case 3:14-cv-01836-MO Document 25 Filed 03/04/15 Page 3 of 5
 

 4- PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE MEMORANDUM 

IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

FOR MEDICAL CONTINUANCE

LEGAL125226833.2 

Perkins Coie LLP

1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor 

Portland, OR 97209-4128 

Phone: 503.727.2000 

Fax: 503.727.2222 

CONCLUSION 

LNV appreciates the reality of a genuine medical issue. Nevertheless, given the scant 

evidence proffered by Defendant in support of her motion and the Defendant’s pattern of delay 

in this case, LNV respectfully requests that the Court deny Defendant’s request for a 120-day 

extension or, at minimum, grant only a short extension so that the factual basis for the request 

can be evaluated prior to the entry of an order granting any further extension. 

DATED: March 4, 2015 PERKINS COIE LLP

By:/s/ Gabrielle D. Richards 

Gabrielle D. Richards, OSB No. 114992 

GRichards@perkinscoie.com 

1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor 

Portland, OR 97209-4128 

Telephone: 503.727.2000 

Facsimile: 503.727.2222 

Case 3:14-cv-01836-MO Document 25 Filed 03/04/15 Page 4 of 5
 

PAGE 1- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

LEGAL125226833.2 

Perkins Coie LLP

1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor 

Portland, OR 97209-4128 

Phone: 503.727.2000 

Fax: 503.727.2222 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I certify that I will serve the foregoing PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE MEMORANDUM 

IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR MEDICAL CONTINUANCE on 

Defendant, Denise Subramaniam at 13865 SW Walker Rd., Beaverton, OR 97005 by depositing 

a copy in the U.S. Mail in a sealed postage-prepaid envelope with the United States Postal 

Service at Portland, Oregon on March 5, 2015. 

DATED: March 4, 2015 /s/ Gabrielle D. Richards 

Gabrielle D. Richards, OSB No. 114992 

GRichards@perkinscoie.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

LNV Corporation 

Case 3:14-cv-01836-MO Document 25 Filed 03/04/15 Page 5 of 5