Schooler

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Schooler

Good Law
106 F. Supp. 3d 1157·2015 WL 1522303·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67382
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 19, 2015Case No. 3:12-cv-2164-GPC-JMACalifornia9,045 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Curiel, J.

ORDER:

(1)AMENDING THE COURT’S APRIL 3, 2015, ORDER;

(2)GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART THE SEC’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON ITS FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF;

(3)DENYING AS MOOT THE SEC’S AMENDED MOTION;

(4)DENYING AS MOOT THE PARTIES’ JOINT MOTION FOR RESCHEDULING OF HEARING DATES AND MODIFICATION OF BRIEFING SCHEDULE;

(5)VACATING HEARING DATE

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the Court finds it appropriate to amend its April 3, 2015, Order Denying the SEC’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on its Fourth Claim for Relief. (ECF No. 1029.) The Court’s prior order incorrectly set forth the law regarding which party bears the burden of proving an affirmative defense on summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. (See ECF No. 1029, at 3-4.) With a correct interpretation of the law, the Court finds that SEC’s initial motion, (ECF No. 685), must be granted in part and denied in part, reversing the Court’s initial determination in the April 3, 2015, Order. The Court further finds that based on its changed ruling, the SEC’s amended motion, (ECF No. 1064), and the parties’ joint motion, (ECF No. 1066), are now moot.

At the May 15, 2015,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.