Free Declaration - District Court of California - California


File Size: 11.0 kB
Pages: 2
Date: August 29, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: California
Category: District Court of California
Author: unknown
Word Count: 381 Words, 2,333 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/casd/264823/53-1.pdf

Download Declaration - District Court of California ( 11.0 kB)


Preview Declaration - District Court of California
Case 3:08-cv-00400-DMS-BLM

Document 53

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 1 of 2

DENNIS R. HIRSCH, Cal. Bar No. 194243 [email protected] DANIEL G. VIOLA, Pro Hac Vice [email protected] SADIS & GOLDBERG LLP 50 California Street, Suite 2320 San Francisco, California 94111 Tel: (415) 490-0563 Counsel for Defendants Tuco Trading LLC and Douglas G. Frederick

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 08 CV 00400 DMS (BLM) DECLARATION OF DENNIS R. HIRSCH IN OPPOSITION TO THE COURT-ISSUED ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RELATING TO JURISDICTION

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, vs. TUCO TRADING, LLC and DOUGLAS G. FREDERICK, Defendants.

{S0000925.DOC}SEC

V. TUCO AND FREDERICK, CASE NO. 08-CV-00400

Case 3:08-cv-00400-DMS-BLM

Document 53

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 2 of 2

I, DENNIS R. HIRSCH, hereby declare, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง1746, as follows: 1. I am an attorney admitted to practice law by the State of California and by the

Southern District of California, among others. I am a partner at Sadis and Goldberg LLP, counsel for defendants Tuco Trading LLC and Douglas G. Frederick. 2. I make this declaration in opposition to the Court-issued order to show cause whether

the Court retains jurisdiction over the matter, including jurisdiction over the defendants' Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 60(b) motion seeking vacatur of the judgment. 3. The issue is now moot as defendants have recently filed, pursuant to Federal Rule of

Appellate Procedure 42(b), a stipulation signed by all parties withdrawing the Notice of Appeal and dismissing the appeal itself. A copy of the stipulation filed with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 4. Accordingly, as the appeal is being withdrawn and dismissed, this Court retains full

jurisdiction. G.C. and K.B. Investments, Inc. v. Wilson, 326 F.3d 1096 (9th Cir. 2003)("Jurisdiction was proper in the district court because the Wilsons had voluntarily dismissed their appeal from the district court's judgment...").

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August 28, 2008, at San Francisco, California.

s/Dennis R. Hirsch Dennis R. Hirsch, Esq. Sadis & Goldberg LLP Counsel for Defendants

{S0000925.DOC}SEC

V. TUCO AND FREDERICK, CASE NO. 08-CV-00400