This miscellaneous action, in which defendant was proceeding pro se, was referred to the undersigned under Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(a) and 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Presently noticed for hearing on April 17, 2013 is judgment creditor and plaintiff Entrepreneur Media, Inc.'s ("EMI") motion for appointment of receiver of domain names and registered trademark. Dckt. Nos. 115, 124, 127. A judgment debtor examination of defendant and judgment debtor Smith is also scheduled for April 17, 2013. Dckt. Nos. 121, 124, 127. Both matters were continued from their originally noticed date of October 17, 2012 after Smith requested a ninety day extension, and were then continued an additional ninety days after Smith requested a second ninety day extension. Dckt. Nos. 122, 124, 125, 127.
On March 27, 2013, Smith filed a third motion for a ninety day extension of time to oppose the motion for appointment of a receiver and a third motion for a ninety day extension of the judgment debtor examination. Dckt. No. 128. Smith contends that he "has been diagnosed with a serious and painful medical condition that is physically preventing him from being able to properly prepare for or attend [the judgment debtor examination], and from being able to properly maintain a continuous and close working relationship with his attorney, Eric Mewes." Id. at 2. Smith also contends that Mewes "has been diligently working on Smith's case, but because he is new on this complicated case that involves numerous issues and has roots dating back over 15 years, Mewes must frequently rely on Smith to be able to quickly provide information and documents that only Smith can provide." Id. at 4. According to Smith, "due to Smith's current medical condition, he has been unable to timely provide Mewes with the information and documents that Mewes needs to properly represent Smith in this proceeding." Id. at 4-5.
Then, on April 2, 2013, Mewes filed a notice of appearance as Smith's counsel in this case pursuant to Local Rule 182(a)(2), as well as an opposition to the motion for appointment of a receiver. Dckt. Nos. 129, 130. Because Smith is now represented by counsel, the referral of this case to the magistrate judge under Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(a) and 302(c)(21) will be withdrawn and the case will be referred back to the district judge.*fn1
Accordingly, the April 17, 2013 hearing on EMI's motion for appointment of a receiver, which is presently set before the undersigned, will be vacated. However, the April 17, 2013 judgment debtor examination, which is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(11), remains on calendar before the undersigned. E.D. Cal. L.R. 302(c)(11) (referring to the magistrate judges "[e]xaminations of judgment debtors in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 69).
Because the hearing date on EMI's motion for appointment of a receiver is vacated, and Mewes has now filed an opposition to that motion on behalf of Smith, Dckt. No. 130, Smith's motion for an extension of time to oppose the motion is moot. Moreover, in light of Mewes' appearance in this action on behalf of Smith, it is unclear whether or why an extension of the April 17, 2013 judgment debtor examination is necessary. Therefore, that request for an extension will be denied.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that
1. Smith's motion for an extension of time to oppose the motion for appointment of a receiver and motion for an extension of the judgment debtor examination, Dckt. No. 128, is denied.
2. The referral of this case to the magistrate judge is withdrawn and the case is referred back to the district judge.
3. The April 17, 2013 hearing on EMI's motion for appointment of a receiver, Dckt. No. 115, which is currently set before the undersigned, is vacated.
4. The April 17, 2013 judgment debtor examination of Smith, Dckt. No. 121, remains on calendar before the undersigned and will ...