On May 20, 2021 a
Motion,Ex Parte
was filed
involving a dispute between
Fenchem, Inc.,
and
Does 1-25,
Sdc Nutrition, Inc.,
for Other Contract Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
Jarrad L. Wood (SBN 3 10688)
Email: jwood@reedsmith.c0m
REED SMITH LLP
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, CA 90071-15 14
Telephone: +1 213 457 8000 ELECTRONICALLY FILED
Facsimile: +1 213 457 8080 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Brian J. Willett (pro hac vice) SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT
Email: bwillet@reedsmith.com PM
12/18/2023 5:13
REED SMITH LLP
599 Lexington Avenue By: Paola Iniguez Solorio, DEPUTY
22nd Floor
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: +1 212 521 5400
Facsimile: +1 212 521 5450
Attorneysfor Defendant, SDC Nutrition, Inc.
10
Delaware
11
0f SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
State
12
LLP
the
in
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
13
SMITH
formed
FENCHEM, INC., No. CIV SB 21 14881
14
REED
partnership
Plaintiff, SDC NUTRITION, INC.’S NOTICE OF
15 MOTION AND MOTION TO
liability
V. CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND
limited
16 RELATED DATES
A SDC NUTRITION, INC.; and DOES 1
17 through 25, inclusive, Complaint Filed: May 20, 2021
FAC Filed: May 18, 2023
18 Defendants.
Date: January 30, 2024
19 Time: 8:30 a.m.
Dept: S32
20
Current Trial Date: February 20, 2024
21 Proposed Trial Date: May 20, 2024
22 [Concurrently Filed With Declaration, and
Proposed Order]
23
24
25
26
27
28
SDC NUTRITION, INC.’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE
AND RELATED DATES
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that 0n January 30, 2024, at 8:30 am. in Department 32 0f the
San Bernardino Superior Court- Civil Division, located at 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino,
CA 92415-0210, Defendant SDC Nutrition, Inc. (“SDC”) Will and hereby does move this Court for
an order continuing the trial date from February 20, 2024 t0 May 20, 2024, 0r a date as soon
thereafter that is convenient for the Court. SDC Further requests that the Court continue all related
dates.
This motion is brought pursuant t0 Code 0f Civil Procedure sections California Rules of
Court 3.1332 and 3.1335. and the Court’s inherent powers t0 make any orders, and t0 control its
10 proceedings, as necessitated in the interests 0f justice. Good cause exist t0 grant SDC’S motion
Delaware
11 given that:
0f
State
12 (1) SDC was required t0 file two motions t0 compel discovery central t0 this case, both of
the
LLP
in
13 Which the Court granted, and Plaintiff Fenchem, Inc. (“Fenchem”) has t0 date failed t0
formed
SMITH
14 complete production in response t0 the Court’s orders;
partnership
REED
15 (2) Fenchem failed t0 produce a sufficiently prepared deposition witness as its Person Most
liability
limited
16 Knowledgeable, and SDC has not been able t0 complete the deposition of Fenchem’s
A
17 person most knowledgeable;
18 (3) Fenchem has recently indicated that it intends to take the deposition 0f SDC’s Person
19 Most Knowledgeable, but has not yet noticed that deposition;
20 (4) Fenchem agrees that the discovery deadlines in this case should be moved; and
21 (5) Fenchem refused t0 provide a substantive response to SDC’s motion for summary
22 judgment on the grounds that Fenchem did not have sufficient notice 0f the hearing on
23 SDC’S motion for summary judgment.
24 Prior to filing this motion, counsel for SDC proposed that the parties stipulate to a
25 continuance of the trial date and related deadlines. Counsel for Plaintiff agreed that it is amenable t0
26 continuing the discovery deadlines; however, Plaintiff refused to agree t0 continue all pre-trial
27 deadlines including the dispositive motion deadline.
28 / / /
1
SDC NUTRITION, INC.’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE
AND RELATED DATES
Document Filed Date
December 18, 2023
Case Filing Date
May 20, 2021
Category
Other Contract Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
Jarrad L. Wood (SBN 3 10688) Email: jwood@reedsmith.c0m REED SMITH LLP 355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2900 Los Angeles, CA 90071-15 14 Telephone: +1 213 457 8000 ELECTRONICALLY FILED Facsimile: +1 213 457 8080 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Brian J. Willett (pro hac vice) SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT Email: bwillet@reedsmith.com PM 12/18/2023 5:13 REED SMITH LLP 599 Lexington Avenue By: Paola Iniguez Solorio, DEPUTY 22nd Floor New York, NY 10022 Telephone: +1 212 521 5400 Facsimile: +1 212 521 5450 Attorneysfor Defendant, SDC Nutrition, Inc. 10 Delaware 11 0f SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA State 12 LLP the in FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 13 SMITH formed FENCHEM, INC., No. CIV SB 21 14881 14 REED partnership Plaintiff, SDC NUTRITION, INC.’S NOTICE OF 15 MOTION AND MOTION TO liability V. CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND limited 16 RELATED DATES A SDC NUTRITION, INC.; and DOES 1 17 through 25, inclusive, Complaint Filed: May 20, 2021 FAC Filed: May 18, 2023 18 Defendants. Date: January 30, 2024 19 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept: S32 20 Current Trial Date: February 20, 2024 21 Proposed Trial Date: May 20, 2024 22 [Concurrently Filed With Declaration, and Proposed Order] 23 24 25 26 27 28 SDC NUTRITION, INC.’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND RELATED DATES TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that 0n January 30, 2024, at 8:30 am. in Department 32 0f the San Bernardino Superior Court- Civil Division, located at 247 West Third Street, San Bernardino, CA 92415-0210, Defendant SDC Nutrition, Inc. (“SDC”) Will and hereby does move this Court for an order continuing the trial date from February 20, 2024 t0 May 20, 2024, 0r a date as soon thereafter that is convenient for the Court. SDC Further requests that the Court continue all related dates. This motion is brought pursuant t0 Code 0f Civil Procedure sections California Rules of Court 3.1332 and 3.1335. and the Court’s inherent powers t0 make any orders, and t0 control its 10 proceedings, as necessitated in the interests 0f justice. Good cause exist t0 grant SDC’S motion Delaware 11 given that: 0f State 12 (1) SDC was required t0 file two motions t0 compel discovery central t0 this case, both of the LLP in 13 Which the Court granted, and Plaintiff Fenchem, Inc. (“Fenchem”) has t0 date failed t0 formed SMITH 14 complete production in response t0 the Court’s orders; partnership REED 15 (2) Fenchem failed t0 produce a sufficiently prepared deposition witness as its Person Most liability limited 16 Knowledgeable, and SDC has not been able t0 complete the deposition of Fenchem’s A 17 person most knowledgeable; 18 (3) Fenchem has recently indicated that it intends to take the deposition 0f SDC’s Person 19 Most Knowledgeable, but has not yet noticed that deposition; 20 (4) Fenchem agrees that the discovery deadlines in this case should be moved; and 21 (5) Fenchem refused t0 provide a substantive response to SDC’s motion for summary 22 judgment on the grounds that Fenchem did not have sufficient notice 0f the hearing on 23 SDC’S motion for summary judgment. 24 Prior to filing this motion, counsel for SDC proposed that the parties stipulate to a 25 continuance of the trial date and related deadlines. Counsel for Plaintiff agreed that it is amenable t0 26 continuing the discovery deadlines; however, Plaintiff refused to agree t0 continue all pre-trial 27 deadlines including the dispositive motion deadline. 28 / / / 1 SDC NUTRITION, INC.’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND RELATED DATES