Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv-00418-PCD

Document 23

Filed 04/23/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ________________________________________________ : SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : : GLOBAL TELECOM SERVICES L.L.C. d/b/a : MEDICAL DISPOSAL DEVICES, : ALBERT D. LATOUCHE and SALVATORE J. : CARTELLI, JR., : : Defendants. : ________________________________________________:

3:03 CV 418 (PCD) MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR FILING JOINT TRIAL MEMORANDUM

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(b) and Judge Dorsey's Supplemental Order for Motion Filing Procedure, Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission"), respectfully requests, that the Court grant an extension for filing a joint trial memorandum, from May 1, 2004 until 30 days after the Court rules on the Commission's summary judgment motion. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(a)(1), this motion is not accompanied by a memorandum of law because no disputed issue of law exists. The Court entered a scheduling order on July 10, 2003, after the parties filed their Form 26(f) Report of Parties Planning Meeting. The Court then extended the deadlines of the Scheduling Order at Defendant's Salvatore J. Cartelli ("Cartelli")'s request after Cartelli retained counsel on or about October 9, 2003. The deadline for dispositive motions was extended to April 23, 2004.

Case 3:03-cv-00418-PCD

Document 23

Filed 04/23/2004

Page 2 of 3

On April 2, 2004, the Court granted the Commission's request to extend the deadline for filing dispositive motions until May 14, 2004. The Commission completed discovery, and on April 1, 2004, the Commission served counsels for defendants Global Telecom Services, LLC d/b/a Medicial Disposal ("Medical Disposal"), Albert D. LaTouche ("LaTouche") and Cartelli (collectively, the "Defendants") with a motion for summary judgment. The Defendants' briefs in opposition are currently due on April 22, 2004. On or about April 17, 2004, Defendants LaTouche and Medical Disposal filed a motion for an extension of time to serve a memorandum in opposition of the Commission's summary judgment motion until May 17, 2004. (If the court grants this motion, the Commission will file the fully briefed motion for summary judgment by June 1, 2004.) At the same time that the parties conducted discovery in the above-captioned action, the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Connecticut ("USAO") has proceeded with a parallel criminal action against LaTouche and Cartelli. On June 25, 2003, the USAO indicted LaTouche and Cartelli for mail fraud relating to same conduct alleged in the Commission's complaint. U.S. v. Albert D. LaTouche and Salvatore J. Cartelli, Jr., 3:03-CR-182 (D. Conn.)(SRU). Jury selection in the criminal proceeding begins on June 10, 2004 and the trial is scheduled for July 6, 2004. The criminal authorities informed the Commission that they expect the criminal trial to conclude by July 20, 2004.1

If the USAO obtains a conviction by guilty plea or by trial, the Defendants may be collaterally estopped from contesting certain facts in this action, thereby saving resources of the Court. 2

1

Case 3:03-cv-00418-PCD

Document 23

Filed 04/23/2004

Page 3 of 3

The Commission requests an extension so that the Commission and the Defendants can conserve resources while the Court considers the Commission's motion for summary judgment.2 The Court's ruling on the Commission's motion for summary judgment may eliminate the need for trial altogether. Even if the Court denies the Commission's motion for summary judgment, the issues for trial may be narrowed. For example, the Court may rule that certain facts and legal issues are not in dispute. Counsel for all Defendants have represented to the undersigned that they do not object to the Commission's request for this extension. WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests an extension for filing a joint trial memorandum.

Dated:

New York, New York April 22, 2004 Respectfully submitted, __________________________________ WILLIAM FINKEL Federal Bar Council No. CT-24904 Attorney for Plaintiff SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279 (646) 428-1716

2

The Commission has moved for summary judgment based on the overwhelming evidence against the Defendants, and the Defendants' assertion of their Fifth Amendment privilege when they refused to testify during discovery. See Baxter v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308, 318 (1976). 3