Dimbali v. ConocoPhillips Company

Filing 13

ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 8/18/09: ConocoPhillips Company's ("COP") time to respond to Plaintiff's complaint is extended 90 days. Nothing herein shall prevent Plaintiff's ability to seek a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against COP, during the 90 day period, before COP has responded to the complaint. (Kaminski, H)

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 FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, THE COURT ORDERS that ConocoPhillips Company's ("COP") time to respond to Plaintiff's complaint is extended 90 days so that the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation can rule on COP's request that this action be consolidated into MDL No. 2040 as a "Tag-Along Action" pursuant to Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Rule 7.4, and Plaintiff can file its motion for remand. Should the Panel not rule on COP's request within 90 days, COP shall report further to the Court so that it may revisit whether a further stay would be appropriate. /// /// /// -1ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND COP'S TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY, a Texas ) corporation and DOES 1 through 10, ) Inclusive, ) ) Defendant. ) ) KASRA KHADIVI DIMBALI, an individual, Case No. 2:09-cv-02242-FCD-EFB ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY'S TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT REMOVAL FILED: 8/11/09 RESPONSE DATE: 8/18/09 NEW RESPONSE: 11/16/09

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

Nothing herein shall prevent Plaintiff's ability to seek a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against COP, during the 90 day period, before COP has responded to the complaint. Dated: August 18, 2009

_______________________________________ FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND COP'S TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT