Entrepreneur Media Inc v. American City Business Journals Inc et al
Filing
13
Third STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to July 15, 2011 re Complaint - (Discovery), Complaint - (Discovery) 1 filed by defendant American City Business Journals Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Sullivan, Sean)
1
2
3
4
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
865 S. FIGUEROA ST.
SUITE 2400
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2566
TELEPHONE (213) 633-6800
FAX (213) 633-6899
JAMES D. NGUYEN (State Bar No. 179370)
jimmynguyen@dwt.com
6 SEAN M. SULLIVAN (State Bar No. 229104)
seansullivan@dwt.com
7
5
8
Attorneys for Defendant
9 AMERICAN CITY BUSINESS JOURNALS, INC.
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
14 ENTREPRENEUR MEDIA, INC., a
California corporation,
15
16
Plaintiff,
vs.
17
AMERICAN CITY BUSINESS
18 JOURNALS, INC., a Delaware
corporation; and DOES 1-10,
19
Defendants.
20
21
22
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. Case No. 11-cv-00722-JVS-AN
THIRD STIPULATION EXTENDING
TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL
COMPLAINT BY 14 DAYS
(L.R. 8-3)
Complaint Served: May 12, 2011
Current Response Date: July 1, 2011
New Response Date: July 15, 2011
23
24
25
26
27
28
THIRD STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
DWT 17511294v1 0068845-000004
1
This stipulation is entered by and between plaintiff Entrepreneur Media, Inc.
2
(“EMI”) and defendant American City Business Journals, Inc. (“ACBJ”) through
3
their respective counsel of record, with reference to the following facts:
4
EMI filed the Complaint in this action on May 11, 2011, and served the
5
Complaint and Summons on ACBJ on May 12, 2011. Thus, ACBJ’s response to the
6
Complaint was originally due on June 2, 2011.
7
8
On May 31, 2011, the parties filed a stipulation to extend the deadline for
ACBJ to respond to the Complaint by 15 days, to June 17, 2011. (Dkt. No. 8.)
9
On June 15, 2011, the parties filed a second stipulation to extend the deadline
10
for ACBJ to respond to the Complaint by an additional 14 days, with the total
11
extension of time granted for ACBJ to respond to the complaint still under 30 days.
12
(Dkt. No. 11.)
13
The parties have been engaged in settlement discussions in an attempt to
14
resolve this matter. EMI sent ACBJ an initial draft of a settlement agreement on
15
June 14, 2011, to which ACBJ responded with comments on June 22, 2011. EMI
16
sent a revised draft of the settlement agreement to ACBJ on June 29, 2011, which
17
ACBJ is in the process of reviewing. To provide the parties sufficient time to
18
finalize a resolution, counsel for the parties have agreed to extend the deadline for
19
ACBJ to respond to the Complaint by two weeks.
20
///
21
///
22
///
23
///
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
1
THIRD STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
DWT 17511294v1 0068845-000004
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
865 S. FIGUEROA ST, SUITE 2400
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2566
(213) 633-6800
Fax: (213) 633-6899
1
2
THEREFORE, EMI and ACBJ, by and through their respective attorneys, do
hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
3
ACBJ shall have until July 15, 2011, to respond to the Complaint.
4
This stipulation is without prejudice to ACBJ’s right to seek, by stipulation or
5
otherwise, any further extensions of time to respond to the Complaint that may be
6
appropriate.
7
8
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
9
10
Dated: June 30, 2011
11
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
By:
12
13
Attorneys for Defendant
AMERICAN CITY BUSINESS
JOURNALS, INC.
14
15
/s/ Sean M. Sullivan
James D. Nguyen
Sean M. Sullivan
Dated: June 30, 2011
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
16
By:
17
18
19
Perry J. Viscounty
Jennifer L. Barry
Sean P. McClure
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ENTREPRENEUR MEDIA, INC.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
THIRD STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
DWT 17511294v1 0068845-000004
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
865 S. FIGUEROA ST, SUITE 2400
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-2566
(213) 633-6800
Fax: (213) 633-6899
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?