Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of California denied King Cohen’s motion for leave to object to a declaration submitted by Rory Chenowth, finding the objection untimely and lacking merit. The court also denied leave to file an untimely affidavit opposing the defendants’ motion to dismiss, concluding that the affidavit was both untimely and immaterial at the motion-to-dismiss stage.
Holdings
- Leave to file the objection was denied because the request was untimely and lacked merit.
- Leave to file the untimely affidavit and accompanying screenshots was denied.
Questions Presented
- Whether Cohen should be granted leave to file a late hearsay objection to Chenowth's declaration.
- Whether Cohen should be granted leave to file an untimely affidavit and accompanying screenshots in opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss.
- Whether Chenowth's statement about his own location was hearsay under Federal Rule of Evidence 801.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (5)
- RG Abrams Ins. v. Law Offices of C.R. Abrams, 342 F.R.D. 461, 485 (C.D. Cal. 2022)(followed)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)(applied)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 545, 570 (2007)(applied)
- Bryan v. MacPherson, 630 F.3d 805, 823 (9th Cir. 2011)(applied)
- Intri-Plex Technologies, Inc. v. Crest Group, Inc., 499 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2007)(applied)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…