22 - Response to Lisa's Motion for Extension

7/29/2019 22 - Response to Lisa's Motion for Extension

1/12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

GINGRAS

LAWOFFICE,P

LLC

3941E.CHANDLERBLVD.,

#106-243

PHOENIX,ARIZONA85048

David S. Gingras, #021097Gingras Law Office, PLLC3941 E. Chandler Blvd., #106-243Phoenix, AZ 85048Tel.: (480) 668-3623Fax: (480) 248-3196

[email protected]

Attorney for Plaintiff Xcentric Ventures, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

XCENTRIC VENTURES, LLC, anArizona limited liability company,

Plaintiff,

v.

LISA JEAN BORODKIN, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No: 11-CV-1426-PHX-GMS

PLAINTIFFS RESPONSE TO

DEFENDANT LISA BORODKINS

MOTION FOR (SECOND)

EXTENSION OF TIME TO

ANSWER/RESPOND

Plaintiff XCENTRIC VENTURES, LLC (Plaintiff or Xcentric) respectfully

submits the following response to Defendant LISA JEAN BORODKINs (Defendant

or Ms. Borodkin) Motion for Extension of Time to Answer/Respond (Doc. #20).

As alleged in Xcentrics Complaint, this is an action for malicious prosecution

asserting claims against former plaintiffs and their attorneys arising from a groundless

lawsuit filed by Defendants in California in early 2010. As alleged in 66 and 67 of the

Complaint, all claims in the underlying California proceeding were resolved in favor of

Xcentric by final judgment dated June 15, 2011. This action was commenced shortly

thereafter on July 18, 2011. Defendant Borodkin was the co-lead counsel for the

plaintiffs in the prior proceeding.

Case 2:11-cv-01426-GMS Document 22 Filed 10/06/11 Page 1 of 12


2/12

2

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

GINGRAS

LAWOFFICE,P

LLC

3941E.CHA

NDLERBLVD.,

#106-243


After avoiding service for nearly a month, Ms. Borodkin was finally served with

Xcentrics Complaint on August 31, 2011, making her Answer due on or before

September 21, 2011. Six days before her Answer was due, on September 15, 2011 Ms

Borodkins retained counsel contacted the undersigned and requested a two-week

extension of time to respond. With no questions asked, undersigned counsel readily

agreed to the request and agreed that Ms. Borodkins Answer would be due on October 5,

2011. Copies of emails documenting this discussion are attached hereto as Exhibits A

and B.

On October 3, 2011, Ms. Borodkins counsel contacted the undersigned via email

and requested another two-week extension, this time stating, We are still analyzing the

Complaint, and determining how to proceed. See Exhibit C. Before undersigned

counsel could respond, on October 4, 2011, Ms. Borodkins counsel sent another email, a

copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit D, this time seeking yet anotherextension

until October 31, 2011, a full two months after she was served. Because there was no

legitimate basis for the second lengthy extension, Xcentric promptly responded and

declined the request resulting in the present motion.

The only basis for Ms. Borodkins current extension request is that instead of

preparing a substantive response to Xcentrics Complaint during the five plus weeks that

have passed since she was served, she has instead drafted a Rule 11 Motion for Sanctions

against Xcentric and Xcentrics counsel. Of course, due to the safe harbor provisions

of Rule 11, Ms. Borodkin must wait 21 days before filing her motion. Based on these

facts, Ms. Borodkin presumes that Xcentric may simply choose to drop its Complaint

against her, and for that reason she has asked for an extension of time until October 31,

2011 to file an Answer; in the interests of judicial economy, as well as to avoid the

incurrence of additional unnecessary legal fees.

Xcentric has reviewed the proposed motion and has determined that it will not

agree to withdraw its claims against Ms. Borodkin. Those claims are well-grounded in

fact, supported by substantial evidence, and are well-supported by existing law.



3/12

3

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

GINGRAS

LAWOFFICE,P

LLC

3941E.CHA

NDLERBLVD.,

#106-243


That being the case, Ms. Borodkin will be required to file a responsive pleading in

this matter, so granting her request will notresult in the avoidance of additional fees nor

will it improve judicial economy. For these reasons, Ms. Borodkins motion should be

denied.

DATED October 6, 2011.

GINGRAS LAW OFFICE, PLLC

/S/ David S. Gingras

David S. Gingras

Attorney for Plaintiff



4/12

4

1

2

3

45

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

GINGRAS

LAWOFFICE,P

LLC

3941E.CHA

NDLERBLVD.,

#106-243


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 6, 2011 I electronically transmitted the attached

document to the Clerks Office using the CM/ECF System for filing, and for transmittalof a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following:

Hartwell Harris, Esq.

LAW OFFICE OF HARTWELL HARRIS

1809 Idaho Avenue

Santa Monica, CA 90403

Attorney for Defendants

Raymond Mobrez

Iliana Llaneras and

Asia Economic Institute, LLC

John S. Craiger, Esq.

David E. Funkhouser III, Esq.

Krystal M. Aspey, Esq.

Quarles & Brady LLP

One Renaissance Square

Two North Central Avenue

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2391

Attorney for Defendant Lisa J. Borodkin

And a courtesy copy of the foregoing delivered to:

HONORABLE G. MURRAY SNOW

United States District Court

Sandra Day OConnor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 622

401 West Washington Street, SPC 80

Phoenix, AZ 85003

/s/David S. Gingras



5/12

Exhibit A



6/12

David Gingras

From: Funkhouser III, David E. [[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 12:44 PM

To: [email protected]

Cc: Funkhouser III, David E.

Subject: Xcentric Ventures, LLC v. Lisa Jean Borodkin et al.

Page 1 of 1

10/6/2011

David-

Quarles & Brady has been retained by Lisa Borodkin in the above-referenced matter. I understand that Ms.

Borodkin was personally served on August 31, which would put her responsive pleading due on or before

Wednesday, September 21.

Because we have just been retained in this matter, would you be willing to provide a two week extension for

Ms. Borodkin's responsive pleading?

If you have any questions, or if you believe this will present a problem, please do not hesitate to email or call.

Thank you in advance for your professional courtesy.

Very Truly Yours,

David

David E. Funkhouser IIIAttorneyQuarles & Brady LLPOne Renaissance SquareTwo North Central AvenuePhoenix, Arizona 85004-2391

www.quarles.comP: (602) 229-5242F: (602) [email protected]

This electronic mail transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be pr

They should be read or retained only by the intended recipient. If you have receive

transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the transmiss

your system. In addition, in order to comply with Treasury Circular 230, we are req

inform you that unless we have specifically stated to the contrary in writing, any a

provide in this email or any attachment concerning federal tax issues or submissions

intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, to avoid federal tax penalties.



7/12

Exhibit B



8/12

David Gingras

From: David Gingras [[email protected]]

Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:01 PM

To: 'Funkhouser III, David E.'

Subject: RE: Xcentric Ventures, LLC v. Lisa Jean Borodkin et al.

Page 1 of 2

10/6/2011

David,

Yes, of course a two week extension is acceptable. Two weeks from 9/21 is 10/5, so I am happy to agree that you can file a

responsive pleading on or before Wednesday, October 5th.

If you need anything else, please let me know.

David S. Gingras, [email protected].: (480) 668-3623Fax: (480) 248-3196

From: Funkhouser III, David E. [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 12:44 PMTo: [email protected]

Cc: Funkhouser III, David E.Subject: Xcentric Ventures, LLC v. Lisa Jean Borodkin et al.

David-

Quarles & Brady has been retained by Lisa Borodkin in the above-referenced matter. I understand that Ms. Borodkin was

personally served on August 31, which would put her responsive pleading due on or before Wednesday, September 21.

Because we have just been retained in this matter, would you be willing to provide a two week extension for Ms. Borodkin's

responsive pleading?

If you have any questions, or if you believe this will present a problem, please do not hesitate to email or call.

Thank you in advance for your professional courtesy.

Very Truly Yours,

David

David E. Funkhouser IIIAttorneyQuarles & Brady LLPOne Renaissance SquareTwo North Central AvenuePhoenix, Arizona 85004-2391www.quarles.comP: (602) 229-5242



9/12

Exhibit C



10/12

David Gingras


Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 10:58 AM



Subject: RE: Xcentric Ventures, LLC v. Lisa Jean Borodkin et al. [QBLLP-ACTIVE.FID35645141]

Page 1 of 1

10/6/2011

Hi David-

Would you be willing to provide us with another two week extension in this matter? We are still analyzing the Complaint, and

determining how to proceed. Also, we understand the other defendants filed a Rule 12 Motion to Dismiss on Friday, and we

need to determine whether we will be joining in that Motion or moving on independent grounds.

I apologize in advance for having to request yet another extension, but please let me know your willingness on the above. If

you are unwilling to provide the full two week request, please let me know what you might be able to do.

I look forward to hearing from you.

David

David E. Funkhouser IIIAttorneyQuarles & Brady LLPOne Renaissance SquareTwo North Central AvenuePhoenix, Arizona 85004-2391www.quarles.comP: (602) 229-5242F: (602) [email protected]



11/12

Exhibit D



12/12

David Gingras


Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2011 4:35 PM



Subject: Xcentric Ventures v. Borodkin, et al. [QBLLP-ACTIVE.FID35645141]

Importance: High

Attachments: 10.4.11 Letter to David Gingras.pdf

Page 1 of 1

David-

Please see the attached letter regarding this matter, as well as the enclosed draft Rule 11 Motion and

accompanying filings. As you will see from the letter, we are sending this to you in the hope that our respective

clients can avoid any additional legal expenses and costs in this matter. Please review this letter, and

accompaniments, and if you would like to discuss, please do not hesitate to email or call.

In addition, and because we are required to comply with the twenty-one day "safe harbor" provisions contained

in Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(2) before filing the Motion, and by way of renewing my request yesterday for an

additional extension, please let me know if you are willing to agree to an additional extension in this matter

through and until October 31, 2011. We believe this amount of time will allow for the proper review of the

attached letter and Motion, with the hope that, again, our respective clients can avoid any additional legal

expenses and costs in this matter.

Please let me know as soon as possible if you are amenable to such a request. If not, we will file independently

with the Court.

I look forward to hearing from you.

David

David E. Funkhouser IIIAttorneyQuarles & Brady LLPOne Renaissance SquareTwo North Central AvenuePhoenix, Arizona 85004-2391www.quarles.comP: (602) 229-5242F: (602) [email protected]

This electronic mail transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be pr

They should be read or retained only by the intended recipient. If you have receive

transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the transmiss

your system. In addition, in order to comply with Treasury Circular 230, we are req

inform you that unless we have specifically stated to the contrary in writing, any a

provide in this email or any attachment concerning federal tax issues or submissions

intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, to avoid federal tax penalties.


22 - Response to Lisa's Motion for Extension

Documents

Transcript of 22 - Response to Lisa's Motion for Extension