Weltch v. G6 Hospitality, LLC et al
Filing
12
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/26/2015 ADOPTING the 11 Stipulation; ORDERING Defendants G6 Hospitality LLC and G6 Hospitality Property LLC to respond to the 4 First Amended Complaint by 5/4/2015. (Michel, G.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
DAVID RAIZMAN, State Bar No. 129407
david.raizman@ogletreedeakins.com
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200
Los Angeles, California 90071
Telephone:
213.239.9800
Facsimile:
213.239.9045
DANIELLE A. HINTON, State Bar No. 273469
danielle.hinton@ogletreedeakins.com
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
Steuart Tower, Suite 1300
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone:
415.442.4810
Facsimile:
415.442.4870
Attorneys for Defendants
G6 HOSPITALITY LLC and
G6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
15 SUZANNE JEANNETTE WELTCH,
Plaintiff,
16
17
v.
18 G6 HOSPITALITY LLC dba MOTEL 6; G6
HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC,
19
Defendant.
20
Case No. 2:15-cv-00333-JAM-CMK
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND
TIME FOR DEFENDANTS G6
HOSPITALITY LLC AND G6
HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC TO
RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (L.R. 144)
21
Complaint Filed:
Complaint Served:
Current Response Date:
New Response Date:
February 9, 2015
February 13, 2015
April 3, 2015
May 4, 2015
22
Trial Date:
None Set
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 2:15-cv-00333-JAM-CMK
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS G6 HOSPITALITY LLC
AND G6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (L.R. 144)
1
Pursuant to Rule 144 of the Local Rules of this Court, plaintiff Suzanne Jeannette Weltch
2
(“Plaintiff”) and defendants G6 Hospitality LLC and G6 Hospitality Property LLC (collectively,
3
“Defendants”) hereby stipulate and seek a Court order that Defendants will have through and
4
including May 4, 2015, in which to serve and file a response to Plaintiff’s complaint in the action.
5
The Parties continue in their good faith efforts to negotiate an early resolution to this matter that
6
will obviate the need for any litigation activity in this action, including Defendants’ need to file a
7
response to the complaint. Previously, the Parties stipulated to a 28-day extension of time for
8
defendants to respond. [Docket No. 007] No Court dates are affected by this extension of time.
9
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
10
11
Respectfully submitted,
DATED: _March 24, 2015
12
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.
13
14
By: /s/ David Raizman
DAVID RAIZMAN
DANIELLE A. HINTON
15
16
Attorneys for Defendants
G6 HOSPITALITY LLC and G6 HOSPITALITY
PROPERTY LLC
17
18
19
DATED:
March 24, 2015
REINER & SLAUGHTER, LLP
20
21
22
23
24
By: /s/ Todd E. Slaughter (as authorized on
March 24, 2015)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SUZANNE JEANNETTE WELTCH
25
26
27
28
1
Case No. 2:15-cv-00333-JAM-CMK
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS G6 HOSPITALITY LLC
AND G6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (L.R. 144)
1
DATED: March 24, 2015
DISABLED ADVOCACY GROUP, APLC
2
3
4
By: /s/ Scottlynn J. Hubbard IV (as authorized on
March 24, 2015)
5
6
7
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SUZANNE JEANNETTE WELTCH
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No. 2:15-cv-00333-JAM-CMK
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS G6 HOSPITALITY LLC
AND G6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (L.R. 144)
1
2
3
4
ORDER
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the Court hereby adopts the Parties’ Stipulation.
Defendants shall have until May 4, 2015 to file a response to Plaintiff’s complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
7
8
DATED: 3/26/2015
/s/ John A. Mendez________________________
THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Case No. 2:15-cv-00333-JAM-CMK
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS G6 HOSPITALITY LLC
AND G6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (L.R. 144)
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?