Fuller v. Sonifi Solutions, Inc. et al.,

Filing 13

STIPULATION and ORDER GRANTING Defendant's deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint, up to and including, November 1, 2019, signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 10/4/2019. (Deutsch, S)

1
2
3
4

Samuel J. Frazier, III, Esq. (SBN 80061)
7860 Mount Vernon Road
Auburn, CA 95603
Telephone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorney for Plaintiff
MARK ALBERT FULLER

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
JAMES T. JONES (SBN 167967)
SIERRA VIERRA (SBN 307874)
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1600
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
SONIFI SOLUTIONS, INC.

12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

MARK ALBERT FULLER,
Plaintiff,

16

19
20

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
CONTINUE DEFENDANT SONIFI
SOLUTIONS, INC.’S DEADLINE TO
RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT

v.

17
18

CASE NO. 2:19-cv-01447-MCE-EFB

SONIFI SOLUTIONS, INC.; COLONY
CAPITAL; AND LODGE NET
CORPORATION, and DOES 1 – 250,
inclusive.

Action Filed:
Trial Date:

Defendants.

21

July 29, 2019
None Set

22

Pursuant to Local Rule 143, Plaintiff MARK ALBERT FULLER (“Plaintiff”) and

23

Defendant SONIFI SOLUTIONS, INC. (“Defendant”) stipulate to and request that the Court

24

enter an order, without further notice or hearing, continuing Defendant’s deadline to respond to

25

Plaintiff’s Complaint up to, and including, November 1, 2019. The parties’ stipulation and

26

proposed order is made based on the following facts:

27

///
1

28
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE
DEFENDANT SONIFI SOLUTIONS, INC.’S
DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT

Case No.: 2:19-CV-01447-MCE-EFB
Fuller v. SONIFI Solutions

1

1.

Plaintiff filed the instant action on July 29, 2019. Plaintiff’s Complaint originally

2

named three defendants: SONIFI Solutions, Inc., Colony Capital, and Lodge Net Corporation

3

(“Defendants”). Plaintiff alleges ten causes of action in a detailed, 10-page Complaint. (Doc. 1)

4

2.

Defendants originally retained the services of the firm, Carothers DiSante &

5

Freudenberger LLP, (“prior defense counsel”) to provide legal representation in this case.

6

Through prior defense counsel, Defendants executed waivers of service. (Docs. 4-5) The waivers

7

of service set Defendants’ response deadline as October 4, 2019.

8

3.

On September 3, 2019, Plaintiff’s counsel and prior defense counsel submitted a

9

Stipulation and Proposed Order to dismiss Defendants Colony Capital and Lodge Net

10

Corporation without prejudice. (Doc. 9) The Court granted the Proposed Order and dismissed

11

Defendants Colony Capital and Lodge Net Corporation without prejudice, leaving Defendant

12

SONIFI Solutions, Inc. as the remaining defendant. (Doc. 10)

13
14

4.

On or about September 4, 2019, Defendant retained Jackson Lewis P.C. (“defense

counsel”) to substitute in as defense counsel for this pending litigation.

15

5.

Upon retention, defense counsel at Jackson Lewis immediately began gathering

16

information for use in evaluating Plaintiff’s Complaint and preparing a responsive pleading.

17

Given the number of causes of action presented, which include allegations of financial fraud,

18

defense counsel requires additional time to prepare a complete response to Plaintiff’s Complaint.

19

The current response deadline additionally falls just after the end of Defendant’s fiscal quarter. As

20

a result, defense counsel’s investigation has been curtailed by business needs and the limited

21

availability of fact witnesses.

22

6.

Plaintiff’s counsel and defense counsel stipulate and agree to extend Defendant’s

23

deadline to respond to the Complaint up to, and including, November 1, 2019. This extension of

24

time will not delay the milestone case deadlines set by the Court, and will not prejudice the

25

parties or the Court. For these reasons, the parties seek the Court’s approval to extend

26

Defendant’s response deadline up to, and including, November 1, 2019.

27

///
2

28
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE
DEFENDANT SONIFI SOLUTIONS, INC.’S
DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT

Case No.: 2:19-CV-01447-MCE-EFB
Fuller v. SONIFI Solutions

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

2

Dated: September 27, 2019

SAMUEL J. FRAZIER, III

3
By: /s/ Sam Frazier (as authorized on 9.27.19)
SAMUEL JEFFERSON FRAZIER, III

4
5

Attorney for Plaintiff
MARK ALBERT FULLER

6
7
8

Dated: September 27, 2019

JACKSON LEWIS P.C.

9
By: /s/ Sierra Vierra
JAMES T. JONES
SIERRA VIERRA
Attorneys for Defendant
SONIFI SOLUTIONS, INC.

10
11
12
13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 4, 2019

16
17
18
_______________________________________
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

3

28
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE
DEFENDANT SONIFI SOLUTIONS, INC.’S
DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT

Case No.: 2:19-CV-01447-MCE-EFB
Fuller v. SONIFI Solutions

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