Case 8:12-cv-00927-DOC-JPR Document 6

Filed 07/05/12 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:130

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

Charles H. Bell, Jr. (Cal. Bar No. 060553) Brian T. Hildreth (Cal. Bar No. 214131) Bell, McAndrews, & Hiltachk, LLP 455 Capitol Mall, Suite 600 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 442-7757 Facsimile: (916) 442-7759 Attorneys for Defendants, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE,ET AL. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN DIVISION RONALD REAGAN COURTHOUSE

DELEGATES TO THE REPUBLICAN ) NATIONAL CONVENTION, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) REPUBLICAN NATIONAL ) COMMITTEE, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) )

Case No. SACV 12 00927 DOC (JPRx) DEFENDANTS REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, ET AL.S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE APPLICATION / MOTION TO INTERVENE Date: n/a Time: 10:30 a.m. Dept: Courtroom 6A Judge: Jean P. Rosenbluth

RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE NOTICE / MOTION TO INTERVENE

Case 8:12-cv-00927-DOC-JPR Document 6

Filed 07/05/12 Page 2 of 4 Page ID #:131

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

Defendants hereby notify this Court that they do not oppose Plaintiffs Ex Parte Application / Motion to Intervene to the extent it seeks to add dozens of new people to this lawsuit as plaintiffs. The Ninth Circuit adjudicates motions based on their substance, rather than their heading or title. See Prudential Real Estate Affiliates, Inc. v. PPR Realty, Inc., 204 F.3d 867, 880 (9th Cir. 2000) ([T]he label attached to a motion does not control its substance.); United States v. Sanger 24 Spectra Boat, 738 F.2d 1043, 1046 (9th Cir. 1984) (holding that a court will construe a motion, however styled, to be the type proper for the relief requested). Here, Plaintiffs counsel seeks to add dozens of additional plaintiffs, whom he represents, to the complaint, in order to join in the existing causes of action against Defendants. The proper way for Plaintiffs counsel to include additional parties who he represents as plaintiffs would have been to file an amended complaint. See, e.g., Thomas v. United States, No. 10-CV-555 (BEN) (JMA), 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52464, at *5 (S.D. Cal. May 17, 2011) (granting leave for plaintiffs to file an amended complaint adding the new Plaintiffs); Leong v. Square Enix of Am. Holdings, Inc., No. CV 09-4484 (PSG) (VBKx), 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47296, at *5 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2010) (noting that the plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint against Defendants, joining additional Plaintiffs); Cota v. Maxwell-Jolly, 688 F. Supp. 2d 980, 990 (N.D. Cal. 2010) (same). Because Defendants had not filed a responsive pleading as of the date Plaintiffs counsel filed his Application / Motion to Intervene, he would have been
1
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE NOTICE / MOTION TO INTERVENE

Case 8:12-cv-00927-DOC-JPR Document 6

Filed 07/05/12 Page 3 of 4 Page ID #:132

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

entitled to file an Amended Complaint as of right at that time. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). Consequently, Defendants would not object to this Court treating the Motion to Intervene as a request to file an Amended Complaint adding the named individuals as additional plaintiffs, and allowing the individuals named in the Motion to join this lawsuit as Plaintiffs on that basis. Should Plaintiffs counsel wish to make additional amendments to his Complaint at a later timeincluding the addition of still further plaintiffshe should be required to seek leave of court under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Dated: July 5, 2012 Respectfully submitted, BELL, McANDREWS & HILTACK, LLP By: /s/ Charles H.Bell, Jr. CHARLES H. BELL, JR. Attorney for Defendants REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, ET AL.

2
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE NOTICE / MOTION TO INTERVENE

Case 8:12-cv-00927-DOC-JPR Document 6

Filed 07/05/12 Page 4 of 4 Page ID #:133

1 2 3 4

PROOF OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury that: I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of 18, and not a party to the within cause of action. My business address is 455 Capitol Mall, Suite 600, Sacramento, CA 95814. On July 5, 2012, I served the following:

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3
PROOF OF SERVICE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE / MOTION TO INTERVENE

DEFENDANTS REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, ET AL.S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE APPLICATION / MOTION TO INTERVENE

on the following party(ies) in said action: Richard C. Gilbert, Esq. Law Offices of Gilbert & Marlowe 950 W. 17th Street, Suite D Santa Ana, CA 92706 Telephone: (714) 667-1038 Email: richardsocal714@aol.com X Plaintiffs

BY U.S. MAIL: By placing said document(s) in a sealed envelope and depositing said envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States Postal Service mailbox in Sacramento, California, addressed to said party(ies), in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on July 5, 2012 at Sacramento, California. /s/ Shannon Diaz SHANNON DIAZ