Bryant v. Supercuts Corporate Shops, Inc. et al
Filing
10
ORDER GRANTING the parties Joint Application for an Extension of Time to June 7, 2017, for defendant Supercuts to file a responsive pleading. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 5/24/2017. (Rooney, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
Catherine M. Dacre (SBN 141988)
cdacre@seyfarth.com
Eden Anderson (SBN 233464)
eanderson@seyfarth.com
560 Mission Street, 31st Floor
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone:
(415) 397-2823
Facsimile:
(415) 397-8549
MISSION LAW FIRM, A.P.C.
Zachary M. Best (SBN 166035)
service@mission.legal
332 North Second Street
San Jose, California 95112
Telephone:
(408) 298-2000
Facsimile:
(408) 298-6046
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RACHEL BRYANT
Attorneys for Defendant
SUPERCUTS CORPORATE SHOPS, INC. dba
SUPERCUTS #9759
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
RACHEL BRYANT,
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
v.
SUPERCUTS CORPORATE SHOPS, INC. dba
SUPERCUTS #9759; TUNG THANH
NGUYEN, Trustee of THE TUNG THANH
NGUYEN AND LIEN THI DUONG 2006
TRUST; LIEN THI DUONG, Trustee of THE
TUNG THANH NGUYEN AND LIEN THI
DUONG 2006 TRUST;
Defendants.
Case No. 1:17-cv-00458 LJO-EPG
JOINT APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME FOR DEFENDANT SUPERCUTS
CORPORATE SHOPS, INC. DBA
SUPERCUTS #9759 TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT ASSERTING
DENIAL OF RIGHT OF ACCESS UNDER
THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES
ACT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF,
DAMAGES, ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND
COSTS (ADA); ORDER THEREON
Complaint Served:
4/5/17
Current Response Date:
5/24/17
New Response Date:
6/7/17
Trial Date:
None Set
District Judge: Hon. Lawrence J. O’Neill
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER THEREON; CASE
NO. 1:17-cv-00458-LJO-EPG
1
Defendant SUPERCUTS CORPORATE SHOPS, INC. dba SUPERCUTS #9759
2
(“Supercuts”) and Plaintiff Rachel Bryant (“Plaintiff”) hereby joint apply for an extension of
3
Supercuts’ responsive pleading deadline. In support of this application, the parties state the
4
following:
5
WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s Complaint was filed on March 30, 2017;
6
WHEREAS, Supercuts was served on April 5, 2017 and, after having obtained an initial 28-
7
day extension through stipulation, its responsive pleading deadline is May 24, 2017;
8
WHEREAS, Supercuts and Plaintiff are in the process of finalizing a settlement agreement
9
and Supercuts would like to avoid the cost of having to prepare a responsive pleading. The parties
10
11
anticipate the settlement agreement can be finalized within the next two weeks.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and through the undersigned parties
12
that Supercuts may have an additional two-week extension of time to respond to the Complaint to and
13
including June 7, 2017. The parties hereby jointly submit this application and jointly request that it
14
be granted for good cause as shown above.
15
16
DATED: May 23, 2017
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
17
By: /s/ Eden Anderson
Eden Anderson
18
19
Attorneys for Defendant
SUPERCUTS CORPORATE SHOPS, INC. dba
SUPERCUTS #9759
20
21
22
DATED: May 23, 2017
MISSION LAW FIRM, A.P.C.
23
24
25
26
By: /s/ Zachary M. Best
Zachary M. Best
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RACHEL BRYANT
27
28
2
JOINT APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER THEREON; CASE
NO. 1:17-cv-00458-LJO-EPG
1
2
3
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
I hereby attest that all signatories listed above, on whose behalf this stipulation is submitted,
concur in the filing’s content and have authorized the filing.
4
5
Dated: May 23, 2017
6
7
By:
/s/ Eden Anderson
Eden Anderson
Attorneys for Defendant
SUPERCUTS CORPORATE SHOPS, INC. dba
SUPERCUTS #9759
8
9
ORDER
10
11
12
The Parties’ Joint Application for Extension of Time is hereby GRANTED. Supercuts shall
have until June 7, 2017 to file its responsive pleading.
13
14
15
16
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
May 24, 2017
/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
JOINT APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT; ORDER THEREON; CASE
NO. 1:17-cv-00458-LJO-EPG
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?