Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO BOOKS-A-MILLION MOTION TO STRIKE

PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO BOOKS-A-MILLION MOTION TO STRIKE

Ratings: (0)|Views: 443|Likes:
Published by meesh6927341

More info:

Published by: meesh6927341 on Sep 22, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/12/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)DANIEL PARISI,
et al.
, ))Plaintiffs, ))v. ) No. 1:10-cv-0897-RJL)LAWRENCE W. SINCLAIR a/k/a “Larry Sinclair”, )
et al.
, ))Defendants. ))
PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO BOOKS-A-MILLION MOTION TO STRIKE
Plaintiffs, Daniel Parisi (“Parisi”), Whitehouse.com Inc., Whitehouse Network LLC(“WNL”), and White House Communications Inc. (“WCI”) (collectively referred to as“plaintiffs”), oppose the motion to strike filed by defendant Books-A-Million, Inc. (“BAM”).Paragraphs 4-17 and 20-24 of the Declaration of Richard J. Oparil and Exs. 1-14 and 17-21 arematerial to the issues raised in BAM’s motion to dismiss the claim, including the assertion, basedon an allegation in another case, that BAM had nothing to do with the synopsis of the defamatorybook BAM sold. Motions to strike are generally disfavored.
See, e.g
.,
 New York City Employees Retirement Sys. v. Berry
, 667 F. Supp. 2d 1121, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2009).Moreover, the facts set forth in the Declaration and the exhibits are relevant to plaintiffs’argument that if the Court were to find that some or all of the claims are subject to dismissal,plaintiffs should be granted leave to file a amended complaint. BAM’s reply did not set forthany argument as to why such leave should not be granted, let alone make any showing as to thefive factors that are taken into account to assess the propriety of a motion for leave to amend:bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to the opposing party, futility of amendment, and whether the
Case 1:10-cv-00897-RJL Document 54 Filed 09/22/10 Page 1 of 3
 
 - 2 -plaintiff has previously amended the complaint.
 Johnson v. Buckley
,
356 F.3d 1067 (9th Cir.2004).For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs respectfully request that BAM’s motion to strike bedenied.Dated: September 22, 2010 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Richard J. OparilRichard J. Oparil (D.C. Bar No. 409723)PATTON BOGGS LLP2550 M Street, NWWashington, DC 20037(202) 457-6000(202) 457-6315 (fax)Kevin M. BellPATTON BOGGS LLP8484 Westpark DriveMcLean, VA 22102(703) 744-8000(703) 744-8001 (fax)Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Case 1:10-cv-00897-RJL Document 54 Filed 09/22/10 Page 2 of 3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->