On March 15, 2022 a Motion-Secondary was filed involving a dispute between Arntsen Family Partnership, Lp, Arntsen, Robert, Brian Christopher Dunn Custodianship, Ho, John, Huang, Quanyu, Lee, Mary, and Black Horse Holdings, Llc, Bragg, David M, Caproc Iii, Llc, Davis, Gregory J, Huang, Quanyu, Huish, Dale, Justesen, Jason, Kludt, Kurtis Stuart, Mclan Trust, Monks Family Trust, Oneil, Scott, Paramont Capital, Llc, Paramont Woodside, Llc, Silicon Valley Real Ventures, Llc, Stoker, Diane, Stoker, Phil, Svrv 385 Moore, Llc, Svrv 387 Moore, Llc, Teh Capital, Llc, Wild Rose Irrevocable Trust, Wolfe, Kevin, Wz Partners Llc, for (16) Unlimited Fraud in the District Court of San Mateo County.
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
Preview
Ryan van Steenis (SBN 254542) Ajamie LLP 2 711 Louisiana Street, South Tower, Suite 2150 3 Houston, Texas 77002 713-860-1600 4 713-860-1699 (Fax) rvansteenis@ajamie.com 5 6 Attorney for Defendants David M. Bragg 8/1/2022 7 Silicon Valley Real Ventures LLC 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 11 Robert Arntsen; Mary Lee; Arnsten Family Case No.: 22-CIV-01148 12 Partnership, LP; and Brian Christopher Dunn Hon. Robert D. Foiles Custodianshi p, 13 [PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFFS ' APPLICATION TO 14 EXPEDITE THE HEARING ON Vs. PLAINTIFFS ' MOTION TO COMPEL AND 15 FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST 16 David M. Bragg; Kurtis Stuart Kludt; Silicon DEFENDANTS DAVID M. BRAGG AND Valley Real Ventures LLC, SVRV 385 Moore, SILICON VALLEY REAL VENTURES , LLC 17 LLC; SVRV 387 Moore, LLC; Gregory 1. Davis; Paramont Woodside, LLC; and Pm'amont 18 Capital, LLC, 19 Defendants. 20 21 22 WHEREAS, the parties did not enter into a stipulation to move the hearing on Plaintiffs' 23 Motion to Compel and for Sanctions Against Defendants David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley 24 Real Ventures, LLC; 25 26 27 28 1 [PROPOSED] Order Denying Plaintiffs ' Application for Expedited Hearing WHEREAS, Plaintiffs failed to show good cause as to why their application for an 2 expedited hearing should be granted; 3 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED : 4 1. That Plaintiffs ' Application for an Order Expediting the Hearing on Plaintiffs ' 5 6 Motion to Compel and For Sanctions Against Defendants David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley 7 Real Ventures, LLC is denied in its entirety; 8 2. The hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel shall be heard on October 7, 2022. 9 Dated: 10 Hon. Robert D. Foiles II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 [PROPOSED] Order Denying Plaintiffs' Application for Expedited Hearing PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to this action. I hereby certify that on 3 August 1,2022, I served the following document(s) on the parties in the above entitled action: 4 [PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' APPLICATION TO EXPEDITE TH ~ 5 HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL AND FOR SANCTIONS 6 AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAVID M. BRAGG AND SILICON V ALLEY REAL VENTURES, LLC 7 Via E-Mail: The above referenced document was emailed to the following persons at the 8 following email addresses: 9 Collin 1. Vierra 10 cvierra@eimerstahl .com Counsel for Plaintiffs 11 12 Jessica Chong j chong@spencerfane.com 13 Brian Zimmerman bzimmerman@spencerfane.com 14 Counsel for Defendants Gregory J Davis, Paramont Woodside, LLC, and PaI'amont 15 Capital, LLC 16 Mark Poe mpoe@gawpoe.com 17 Counsel jor Defendant Kurtis S. Kludt 18 I declare under penalty of peljury under the laws of the State of California that the 19 foregoing is a true and correct statement. 20 21 Dated: August 1, 2022 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 [PROPOSED] Order Denying Plaintiffs' Application for Expedited Hearing