[DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR HEARING ON SHORTENED TIME AND IN OPPOSITION… — USA v. Ayvazyan et al (Dkt. 1299)

Summary

Defendant Marietta Terabelian, through appellate counsel Ethan A. Balogh, opposes a motion for hearing on shortened time and the unsealing of documents, Document 1299, filed 04/29/22 in Case No. 20 Cr. 579 (USCA Case No. 21-50291), before Judge Stephen V. Wilson. The proposed intervenors, WFG and Novastar, sought sealed documents for use in their civil trials against some defendants. The opposition says there is no exigency for WFG's July 2022 trial and that any urgency for Novastar's May 17, 2022 trial is of its own making, since it learned of the case from a TV clip on March 29, 2022 and waited a month to file. Counsel adds that he was only recently appointed for her appeal and asks that the matter be briefed in the normal course.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Record facts

Full text

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
 
ETHAN A. BALOGH, No. 172224 
BALOGH & CO., APC 
100 Pine Street, Suite 1250 
San Francisco, CA 94111 
Telephone: 415.391.0440 
Facsimile: 415.373.3901 
eab@balcolaw.com 
 
Attorneys for Defendant 
MARIETTA TERABELIAN 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 WESTERN  DIVISION 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 
Plaintiff/Appellee, 
v. 
MARIETTA TERABELIAN, 
Defendant/Appellant. 
Case No. 20 Cr. 579 SVB 
USCA Case No. 21-50291  
 
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO 
MOTION FOR HEARING ON 
SHORTENED TME AND IN 
OPPOSITION TO UNSEALING 
 
 
Before the Honorable Stephen V. Wilson 
United States District Judge 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW     Document 1299     Filed 04/29/22     Page 1 of 4   Page ID
#:19952

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
 
 
1 
 
Months after trial ended, two prospective intervenors—WFG Tile Insurance 
Co.,  (“WFG”) and Novastar, LLC (“Novastar”) (collectively, “Intervenors”)—
filed an emergency ex parte application to intervene and obtain sealed documents 
on a motion heard on shortened time.  As Intervenors tell it, they were watching 
the news on March 29, and got an idea about how to obtain documents for use in 
their upcoming civil trials against a subset of the defendants in this case.  See Ex 
Parte Application for Order Shortening Time at 5-6. 
 
But there is no exigency, and any exigency is a result of the proposed 
Intervenors dilatory conduct.  The Court should deny the proposed Intervenors 
motions summarily.  At a minimum, the Court should deny proposed Intervenors 
ex parte application for an Order Shortening Time, and set the matter for briefing 
hearing in the normal course, for three reasons: 
1. There is no exigency with respect to WFG’s July 2022 trial, and WFG 
makes no showing to support its claim of exigency.   
2. Any exigency with respect to Novastar’s May 17, 2022 trial is of its own 
creation.  Novastar knew or should have known about this criminal case 
and the 2021 criminal trial, and could have tracked the litigation and 
brought this motion months earlier.  Instead, Novastar claims exigency 
now because (a) it didn’t think to do track the criminal case and filings 
therein until it saw a clip on TV on March 29, 2022, and (b) even then, 
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW     Document 1299     Filed 04/29/22     Page 2 of 4   Page ID
#:19953

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
 
 
2 
waited a month to file this application, and requiring defendants’ 
response in less one day.  Undersigned counsel has not had sufficient 
time to address the issues presented by proposed Intervenors motion, and 
it is fundamentally unfair to require a substantive response in less than 
one day. 
3. In addition, Ms. Terabelian’s undersigned counsel has only recently been 
appointed to address her direct appeal, and lacks familiarity with this case 
at this early juncture.  Proposed Intervenors extraordinary delay to bring 
their motions should not prejudice Ms. Terabelian and her right to 
consider carefully and brief these issues in the normal course.   
Ms. Terabelian thus respectfully asks the Court to deny the proposed 
Intervenors motions.  At a minimum, the Court should deny proposed Intervenors 
ex parte application for an Order Shortening Time and set the matter for briefing 
and hearing in the normal course.   
Respectfully submitted, 
DATED: April 29, 2022  
 
BALOGH & CO., APC 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ E A Balogh 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ETHAN A. BALOGH 
 
 
 
 
 
 
100 Pine Street, Suite 1250 
 
 
 
 
 
 
San Francisco, CA 94111 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Attorneys for Defendant 
 
 
 
 
 
 
MARIETTA TERABELIAN 
 
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW     Document 1299     Filed 04/29/22     Page 3 of 4   Page ID
#:19954

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
 
 
3 
PROOF OF SERVICE 
 
 
I, Ethan A. Balogh, certify that on the date set forth below, I served all 
parties in this matter by causing the preceding pleading to be filed electronically 
through the Court’s ECF system, as set forth by Local Rule 5-3.2.1.  In addition, I 
emailed this Opposition to Counsel for Proposed Intervenors: Lori C. Hershorin, at 
lorih@hhlawgroup.com 
/s/ E A Balogh 
DATED: April 29, 2022  
 
 
 
ETHAN A. BALOGH 
Case 2:20-cr-00579-SVW     Document 1299     Filed 04/29/22     Page 4 of 4   Page ID
#:19955

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.cacd.813904.1299.0.pdf

Size

150,049 bytes

SHA-256

2e8709ff2182de1d73c8c7c4b5c947f70af58def3013cc480af85a83f7843954

Our copy

gov.uscourts.cacd.813904.1299.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)