Parisi V Sinclair: 90 - Parisi Reponse To 88

Case 1:10-cv-00897-RJL Document 90 Filed 12/08/10 Page 1 of 5
t
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
.ne
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)
DANIEL PARISI, et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
v. ) Civil Action No. 10-0897-RJL
)
LAWRENCE W. SINCLAIR a/k/a “Larry Sinclair”, et al., )
tor
)
Defendants. )
)
PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO SINCLAIR’S MOTION TO CONTINUE THE STATUS

CONFERENCE FROM DECEMBER 22, 2010 TO JANUARY 26, 2011,
OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO PERMIT SINCLAIR
ula
TO APPEAR BY TELEPHONE ON DECEMBER 22, 2010
Plaintiffs’ Daniel Parisi, Whitehouse.com Inc., Whitehouse Network LLC, and White
House Communications Inc. (collectively “plaintiffs”), hereby respond to the consent motion of
pro se defendant Lawrence W. Sinclair (“Sinclair”) to continue the status conference from
December 22, 2010 to January 26, 2011 (Dkt. No. 88). Plaintiffs did not oppose Sinclair’s
eg
request that all parties agree to seek a continuance from December 22 to “January 2011” (Ex. 1).
Now, however, Sinclair’s consent motion asks the Court to move the conference to a single date
– January 26, 2011. The Court’s calendar may not be accommodate Sinclair’s request for a
eR
conference on that specific date.
Plaintiffs file this response to urge the Court not to continue the initial status conference
past January 26, 2010. This case was filed on May 28, 2010 (Dkt. No. 1). All defendants save
Jeffrey Rense were served by June 17, 2010 (Dkt. Nos. 3-6, 16, 22). Many of the parties have
Th
filed summary judgment motions, and plaintiffs have averred that they need discovery under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f). A further delay – of over a month – would unfairly prejudice plaintiffs.
PDF processed with CutePDF evaluation edition www.CutePDF.com

t
Plaintiffs respectfully recommend that the Court avail itself of Sinclair’s alternative
.ne
request to be allowed to appear at the December 22, 2010 hearing telephonically. Sinclair would
not be prejudiced by such an order, as telephone conferences are regularly held in this and other
federal courts.
December 8, 2010 Respectfully submitted,
tor
/s/ Richard J. Oparil
Richard J. Oparil (D.C. Bar No. 409723)
PATTON BOGGS LLP
2550 M Street, NW
Washington, DC 20037
(202) 457-6000
(202) 457-6315 (fax)
ula Kevin M. Bell
PATTON BOGGS LLP
8484 Westpark Drive
McLean, VA 22102
(703) 744-8000
(703) 744-8001 (fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

eg
eR
Th
-2-
t
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
.ne
I hereby certify that on December 8, 2010, a copy of the foregoing was served on parties
and counsel for the parties that have appeared in the case by the Court’s ECF system.
s/ Richard J. Oparil
Richard J. Oparil (DC Bar No. 409723)
tor
ula
eg
eR
Th
-3-
t
.ne
Ex. 1
tor
ula
eg
eR
Th
Page 1 of 1
t
Oparil, Richard
.ne
From: Larry [[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 12:28 PM
To: Oparil, Richard; 'Eastburg, Rory'; 'Steinman, Linda'; 'Segal, Matthew'; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; 'Zawitoski, JoAnne';
[email protected]; [email protected]; Bell, Kevin
Subject: Proposed Status Conference Hearing Date Parisi v Sinclair
Dear Counsel:

tor
Thank you for your speedy response to my request for agreement to move the December 22, 2010 hearing
scheduled by Judge Leon.

I am preparing to file a motion to move the December 22, 2010 hearing date to January 2011. Please advise me by
return email if any of the parties have any objections or conflicts with the proposed dates for setting said hearing.

January 19 or 20, 2011

January 26 or 27, 2011

ula
If there are no objection or conflicts, I will request the Court move the Dec 22, 2010 hearing to one of those four
dates.

Thank you all for your speedy response.

Have a great weekend.

eg
Respectfully,

Lawrence W. Sinclair d/b/a
Sinclair Publishing
Post Office Box 9222
Chattanooga, TN 37412
[email protected]
eR

Th
DISCLAIMER:
This e‐mail message contains confidential, privileged information intended solely for the addressee. Please do not
read, copy, or disseminate it unless you are the addressee. If you have received it in error, we would appreciate your
forwarding the message back to us and deleting it from your system. Thank you.

12/8/2010

Parisi V Sinclair: 90 - Parisi Reponse To 88

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Parisi V Sinclair: 90 - Parisi Reponse To 88

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Parisi V Sinclair: 90 - Parisi Reponse To 88

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:10-cv-00897-RJL Document 90 Filed 12/08/10 Page 1 of 5

PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO SINCLAIR’S MOTION TO CONTINUE THE STATUS

conference on that specific date.

PDF processed with CutePDF evaluation edition www.CutePDF.com

December 8, 2010 Respectfully submitted,

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

You might also like