MOTION TO STRIKE SHERMAN RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISQUALIFY [DOC 172] - Page 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
NETSPHERE, INC., § Civil Action No. 3-09CV0988-F
MANILA INDUSTRIES, INC., and §
MUNISH KRISHAN, §
Plaintiffs. §
§
v. §
§
JEFFREY BARON, and §
ONDOVA LIMITED COMPANY, §
Defendants. §
MOTION TO STRIKE SHERMAN RESPONSE TO MOTION TO
DISQUALIFY [DOC 172]
TO THE HONORABLE ROYAL FURGESON, U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE:
COMES NOW, Jeffrey Baron, Appellant, and respectfully requests this
Court to strike the response to Motion to Disqualify Mr. Urbanik filed by Mr.
Sherman [DOC 172] and award costs to Mr. Baron because Mr. Sherman’s motion
was filed in multifarious violation of Rule 11(c)(2).
Mr. Sherman’s response [DOC 172] includes in the same instrument a
“Motion for Sanctions”. Mr. Sherman’s motion directly violates Rule 11(c)(2) in
that:
1. The motion for sanctions was not filed separately.
2. The motion for sanctions was not first served under Rule 5 prior to filing
and presentment to the Court.
Case 3:09-cv-00988-F Document 183 Filed 12/24/10 Page 1 of 3 PageID 4434
MOTION TO STRIKE SHERMAN RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISQUALIFY [DOC 172] - Page 2
Appellate counsel for Mr. Baron has raised substantive legal issues to the
attention of the Court. In response counsel has been faced with a serious of
personally directed charges and accusations, brought both by Mr. Sherman and on
behalf of the receiver.
The Rules of Procedure are specifically designed so that accusations of
sanctionable conduct will be not be used as a tool of advocacy. Firstly, such
accusations must be made separately, so as not to taint the issues raised in another
matter. Secondly, a party must first attempt to confer with counsel weeks prior to
presenting the accusations to the Court.
Mr. Sherman’s conduct in attempting to bypass the rules and improperly
inject allegations of sanctionable conduct is clearly in violation of Rule 11.
Pursuant to Rule 11(c)(2) an award of reasonable expenses including attorney’s
fees incurred on behalf of Mr. Baron in responding to the motion are proper.
Accordingly, Mr. Baron respectfully requests this Court to strike the response
filed by Mr. Sherman to the Motion to Disqualify Mr. Urbanik [DOC 172] and
award costs to Mr. Baron.
Case 3:09-cv-00988-F Document 183 Filed 12/24/10 Page 2 of 3 PageID 4435
MOTION TO STRIKE SHERMAN RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISQUALIFY [DOC 172] - Page 3
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Gary N. Schepps
Gary N. Schepps
State Bar No. 00791608
Drawer 670804
Dallas, Texas 75367
(214) 210-5940
(214) 347-4031 Facsimile
APPELLATE COUNSEL FOR
JEFFREY BARON
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that this was served on all parties who receive notification
through the Court’s electronic filing system.
/s/ Gary N. Schepps
Gary N. Schepps
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
This is to certify that the undersigned called and left messages for Mr. Raymond J.
Urbanik, attorney for DANIEL J. SHERMAN, Trustee for ONDOVA LIMITED
COMPANY, and they did not return the calls.
/s/ Gary N. Schepps
Gary N. Schepps
Case 3:09-cv-00988-F Document 183 Filed 12/24/10 Page 3 of 3 PageID 4436
