Soto v. Graybar Electric Company, Inc., et al.

Filing 5

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEFENDANT'S RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE PENDING THE COURT'S RULING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR REMAND. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 5/8/2024. (Kusamura, W)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

JOHN SOTO, an individual and on behalf of
all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16
17
18

vs.

Case No.: 1:24-cv-00520-SKO
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO
CONTINUE DEFENDANT’S
RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE
PENDING THE COURT’S RULING ON
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND

GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC., a
New York corporation; ERNESTO ACOSTA,
an individual; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive,
Defendants.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE
PENDING THE COURT’S RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND

1

Having considered the parties’ stipulation to vacate Defendant Graybar Electric Company,

2

Inc.’s responsive pleading deadline pending the Court’s ruling on Plaintiff John Soto’s anticipated

3

motion for remand, and upon good cause shown,

4

THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

5

1.

The deadline for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint is STAYED;

6

2.

Plaintiff shall file his motion for remand by May 31, 2024; and

7

3.

Should the Court deny Plaintiff’s motion for remand, within 14 days of issuing

8

such an order, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint or, if no amended complaint is filed,

9

Defendant shall have 28 days from the issuance of such order to file a responsive pleading to the

10

original complaint.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13

Dated:

14

May 8, 2024

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto

.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE
PENDING THE COURT’S RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND