Northern California River Watch v. Golden Technology Company et al
Filing
8
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING. Signed by Judge Alsup on July 2, 2009. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/2/2009)
Case3:09-cv-02581-WHA Document7
Filed07/01/09 Page1 of 3
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
SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P.
One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, California 941113492
Ethan A. Miller (State Bar No. 155965) David A. Gabianelli (State Bar No. 158170) SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94111-3492 Telephone: +1.415.954.0200 Facsimile: +1.415.393.9887 Email: eamiller@ssd.com Email: dgabianelli@ssd.co m Attorneys for Defendant PACIFIC INDEMNITY COMPANY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION)
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH, a non-profit corporation, Plaint iff, vs. GOLDEN TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, PACIFIC INDEMNITY COMPANY, ARNOLD CARSTON, LARRY CARRILLO, FRANCINE CLAYTON, DOES 1 - 30, Inclusive, Defendants.
CASE NO. CV-09-2581 (WHA) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING, CASE NO. CV09-2581 (WHA)
Case3:09-cv-02581-WHA Document7
Filed07/01/09 Page2 of 3
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
SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P.
One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, California 941113492
WHEREAS, Northern California River Watch filed this action on June 10, 2009, WHEREAS, Pacific Indemnity Company, through its registered agent for service of process, received service of the Summons and Complaint in this matter on June 12, 2009, WHEREAS, the counsel for the parties have been in communication, and WHEREAS, Pacific Indemnity Company requires additional time to prepare a responsive pleading is specially appearing only for this reason, Northern California River Watch and Pacific Indemnity Company STIPULATE as follows: The time for Pacific Indemnity Company to file an initial responsive pleading shall be extended from July 2, 2009 to July 30, 2009.
IT IS SO STIPULATED. DATED: July 1, 2009 LAW OFFICE OF JACK SILVER
By:
/s/ Jack Silver JACK SILVER NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH
DATED:
July 1, 2009
SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P.
By:
/s/ David A. Gabianelli DAVID A. GABIANELLI
PACIFIC INDEMNITY COMPANY PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: 2 July _____, 2009
UNIT ED
S DISTRICT TE C TA
RT U O
United States District Judge
Judge W illiam A lsup
ER
N
-1-
F D IS T IC T O R
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING, CASE NO. CV09-2581 (WHA)
A
C
LI
FO
R NIA
DERED SO OR IT IS HON. WILLIAM H. ALSUP
NO
S
RT
H
Case3:09-cv-02581-WHA Document7
Filed07/01/09 Page3 of 3
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
SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P.
One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, California 941113492
PROOF OF SERVICE (Pursuant to Federal Law) I, LANII LANGLOIS, am employed in the County of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is One Maritime Plaza, Third Floor, San Francisco, California 94111-3492. On July 1, 2009, I served the foregoing document described as: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING Via United States District Court Electronic Filing Service on the parties as set forth below: Jack Silver, Esq. Law Office of Jack Silver P.O. Box 5469 Santa Rosa, CA 95042-5469 Tel. 707-528-8175 Fax. 707-528-8675 Executed on July 1, 2009, at San Francisco, California. I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. /s/ Lanii Langlois LANII LANGLOIS
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE A RESPONSIVE PLEADING, CASE NO. CV09-2581 (WHA)
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?