Miller v. Equifax, Inc. et al

Filing 27

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 5/2/2018 ORDERING the deadline for Defendant to respond to Plaintiffs complaint is hereby EXTENDED to 6/1/2018. No other deadlines shall be affected by this Order. (Washington, S)

Download PDF
1 MARK D. LONERGAN (State Bar No. 143622) REBECCA S. SAELAO (State Bar No. 222731) 2 ALISA A. GIVENTAL (State Bar No. 273551) SEVERSON & WERSON 3 A Professional Corporation One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600 4 San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 398-3344 5 Facsimile: (415) 956-0439 6 ROCHELLE L. SMITH (State Bar No. 316225) SEVERSON & WERSON 7 A Professional Corporation The Atrium 8 19100 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 700 Irvine, California 92612 9 Telephone: (949) 442-7110 Facsimile: (949) 442-7118 10 Attorneys for Defendants 11 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 14 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO DIVISION — SACRAMENTO DIVISION 15 16 CRYSTAL MILLER, 17 18 Case No. 2:18-CV-00126-JAM-CKD Hon. John A. Mendez Plaintiff, vs. 19 EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC,; EQUIFAX, INC.; BANK OF 20 AMERICA, N.A.; HARLEY DAVIDSON CREDIT CORPORATION, WELLS FARGO 21 BANK, N.A., AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100 INCLUSIVE, 22 Defendant. 23 JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND ORDER Complaint Served: Orig. Response Deadline: New Response Deadline: New. Response Deadline: Prop Response Deadline: February 12, 2018 March 5, 2018 April 2, 2018 May 2, 2018 June 1, 2018 24 Pursuant to United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Civil Local Rule 25 144(a), which requires Court approval for any extension to respond to the initial complaint beyond 26 28 days, plaintiff Crystal Miller (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 27 (“Defendant”), hereby jointly move for an extension for Defendant to file its responsive pleading 28 07685.1986/11197945.1 JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 based on the following facts: 2 1. Plaintiff served the Complaint on February 12, 2018; 3 2. Defendant’s deadline to respond to the Complaint was March 5, 2018; 4 3. Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a stipulation to postpone the response deadline 5 to April 2, 2018; 6 4. Plaintiff and Defendant are engaged in settlement discussions and jointly moved to 7 extend the response deadline to May 2, 2018 , the request was granted; 8 5. Plaintiff and Defendant are continuing settlement discussions and believe that they 9 can resolve their dispute if an additional 30 day extension is granted by the Court. 10 6. Plaintiff and Defendant therefore move jointly to extend for the third time 11 Defendant’s deadline to respond to the Complaint to June 1, 2018. 12 DATED: May 2, 2018 SAGARIA LAW, P.C. 13 14 By: 15 /s/ Elliott W. Gale Elliot W. Gale 16 Attorneys for Plaintiff CRYSTAL MILLER 17 18 DATED: May 2, 2018 19 SEVERSON & WERSON A Professional Corporation 20 By: 21 /s/ Rochelle L.Smith Rochelle L. Smith 22 Attorneys for Defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. 23 24 I, Rochelle L. Smith, am the ECF user whose identification and password are being used to 25 file this Stipulation. I hereby attest that Elliot Gale has concurred in this filing. 26 27 By: /s/ Rochelle L. Smith 28 07685.1986/11197945.1 2 JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 1 2 ORDER Pursuant to the joint motion of plaintiff Crystal Miller and defendant Wells Fargo Bank, 3 N.A., and good cause appearing, the deadline for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint is 4 hereby extended to June 1, 2018. No other deadlines shall be affected by this Order. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 DATED: May 2, 2018 7 /s/ John A. Mendez________ HON. JOHN A MENDEZ. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 07685.1986/11197945.1 3 JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

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?