ACTIVE 206707132v.1

No. 14-15-00194-CV 

________________________________

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

________________________________

VICNRG LLC,

Appellants,

v.

FCSTONE, LLC, FCSTONE TRADING, LLC

and FCSTONE GROUP, INC.,

Appellees.

________________________________

APPELLEES’ RESPONSE TO APPELLANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO 

ENLARGE PERIOD DURING WHICH IT MIGHT REPSOND TO 

APPELLEES’ MOTOIN TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION 

________________________________

On Appeal from the 334th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Cause No. 2013-05124B

Hon. Grant Dorfman, Presiding

________________________________

Mark K. Glasser

Texas Bar No. 08014500

Tracy N. LeRoy

Texas Bar No. 24062847

Sidley Austin LLP

1000 Louisiana, Suite 6000

Houston, Texas 77002

Telephone: 713-495-4500

Facsimile: 713-495-7799

David Hoffman (admitted pro hac vice)

Illinois State Bar No. 6229441

Kees Vandenberg (admitted pro hac vice)

Illinois State Bar No. 6301079

Sidley Austin LLP

One South Dearborn

Chicago, Illinois 60606

Telephone: 312- 853-7000 

Facsimile: 312-853-7036

Attorneys for Appellees-Defendants 

FCStone, LLC, FCStone Trading, LLC and 

FCStone Group, Inc.

ACCEPTED

14-15-00194-CV

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

3/24/2015 11:46:32 AM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 3/24/2015 11:46:32 AM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
1

Appellees FCStone, LLC, FCStone Trading, LLC, and FCStone Group, Inc. 

(“FCStone”) respectfully respond to Appellant VicNRG, LLC’s (“Appellant’s”) 

Unopposed Motion to Enlarge Period During Which it Might Respond to 

Appellees’ Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction to correct VicNRG’s 

mischaracterizations of the procedural posture of this case. While FCStone does 

not object to VicNRG’s request for additional time to respond to FCStone’s 

Motion to Dismiss (although FCStone notes that VicNRG appears to have been 

able to substantively respond to the Motion to Dismiss in its Motion to Enlarge), 

FCStone does object to VicNRG’s mischaracterizations of FCStone’s Motion and 

the trial court record.

First, FCStone’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction was not filed in 

“respon[se]” to the Court’s order granting VicNRG’s request that this appeal not 

be treated as an accelerated appeal, as stated in VicNRG’s Motion to Enlarge (para. 

4). FCStone’s Motion is premised on the fact that VicNRG did not timely file its

notice of appeal from judgment, not this Court’s order granting VicNRG’s request.

Second, VicNRG mischaracterizes the procedural history of this case. The 

trial court signed a summary judgment order in favor of FCStone on August 1, 

2014; VicNRG’s insistence that there is only a “proposed order” in the record is 

simply baffling (para. 4). Likewise, FCStone did not submit a proposed judgment 

to the trial court after the motion for severance was granted and the severance 
2

ACTIVE 206707132v.1

order signed, as stated by VicNRG (id.). FCStone had, in the abundance of 

caution, submitted both a proposed severance order and a proposed judgment with 

its motion to sever on the assumption that the trial court would enter them the same 

day. As discussed in FCStone’s Motion to Dismiss, when the trial court signed the 

severance order, the summary judgment became final and appealable, and entry of 

a later judgment would violate the final judgment rule.

Third, and finally, VicNRG’s contention that FCStone has “had months” to 

prepare FCStone’s “lengthy” Motion to Dismiss is flatly wrong. VicNRG filed its 

first, “conditional” notice of appeal in this Court on February 20, and its second 

amended notice of appeal on March 12. FCStone filed its 12-page Motion to 

Dismiss six days later, less than one month after VicNRG first appealed. VicNRG 

offers no basis for its claim that FCStone should have filed a Motion to Dismiss 

prior to VicNRG even filing its untimely appeal.

In sum, while FCStone has no objection to enlarging VicNRG’s time to 

respond to its Motion to Dismiss, FCStone does object to VicNRG’s use of its 

Unopposed Motion to Enlarge to misstate the record.
3

ACTIVE 206707132v.1

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Mark K. Glasser

Mark K. Glasser

State Bar No. 08014500

Tracy N. LeRoy

State Bar No. 24062847

SIDLEY AUSTIN, LLP

1000 Louisiana, Suite 6000

Wells Fargo Plaza

Houston, Texas 77002

713-495-4500 (telephone) 

713-495-7799 (facsimile)

mglasser@sidley.com

tleroy@sidley.com

David Hoffman (admitted pro hac 

vice)

Illinois State Bar No. 6229441

Kees Vandenberg (admitted pro hac 

vice)

Illinois State Bar No. 6301079

SIDLEY AUSTIN, LLP

One South Dearborn

Chicago, Illinois 60606

(312) 853-7000 (telephone)

(312) 853-7036 (facsimile)

david.hoffman@sidley.com

c.vandenberg@sidley.com

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS FCSTONE, 

LLC, FCSTONE TRADING, LLC, and 

FCSTONE GROUP, INC.
4

ACTIVE 206707132v.1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing documents was 

forwarded to all counsel of record on the 24th day of March, 2015, by electronic 

mail and U.S. mail. 

Daniel E. Blumberg

Peter F. Bagley

Blumberg & Bagley, L.L.P.

2304 W. Interstate 20, Suite 190

Arlington, Texas 76017

Tel: (817) 277-1500

Fax: (817) 277-1170

James T. Drakeley

R. Scott Seifert

Hiersche, Hayward, Drakeley & Urbach, P.C.

15303 Dallas Parkway, Suite 700

Addison, Texas 75001

By: /s/ Tracy N. LeRoy