Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Path America, LLC, C15-1350JLR. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20171228e51 Visitors: 3
Filed: Dec. 27, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 27, 2017
Summary: ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR AN ORDER APPROVING THE SETTLMENT OF CLAIMS RE ZHOU YAN JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . Before the court is the Receiver Michael A. Grassmueck's motion for an order approving the terms of the Receiver's settlement of claims regarding Zhou Yan. (Mot. (Dkt. # 604).) An opposition to the motion was due by December 26, 2017. See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(d)(3) ("Any opposition papers shall be filed and served not later than the Monday before the noting date.").
More

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR AN ORDER APPROVING THE SETTLMENT OF CLAIMS RE ZHOU YAN

Before the court is the Receiver Michael A. Grassmueck's motion for an order approving the terms of the Receiver's settlement of claims regarding Zhou Yan. (Mot. (Dkt. # 604).) An opposition to the motion was due by December 26, 2017. See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(d)(3) ("Any opposition papers shall be filed and served not later than the Monday before the noting date."). No party has filed a response to the motion. (See generally Dkt.; see also Notice of Non-Receipt of Opposition (Dkt. # 605).)

"[I]f a party fails to file papers in opposition to a motion, such failure may be considered by the court as an admission that the motion has merit." Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(b)(2). Further, the court has reviewed the Receiver's motion and has considered (a) the probability of success in the litigation, (b) the difficulties to be encountered in the matter of collection, (c) the complexity of the litigation involved and the expense, inconvenience, and delay necessarily attending it, and (d) the paramount interest of the creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views. See In re Woodson, 839 F.2d 610, 620 (9th Cir. 1988). The court concludes that these factors weigh in favor of approving the settlement and that the settlement is in the best interest of the Receivership. Accordingly, the court GRANTS the Receiver's motion (Dkt. # 604).

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer