Bensi et al v. Litke Properties, Inc

Filing 13

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO ANSWER re 12 Stipulation, filed by Stationary Engineers Local 39 Health and Welfare Trust Fund, Lyle Setter, Jerry Kalmar, Bart Florence, Stationary Engineers Local 39 Annuity Trust Fund, Paul Bensi. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 11/21/11. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2011)

Download PDF
5 WILLIAM A. SOKOL, Bar No. 072740 LINDA BALDWIN JONES, Bar No. 178922 EZEKIEL D. CARDER, Bar No. 206537 WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD A Professional Corporation 1001 Marina Village Parkway, Suite 200 Alameda, California 94501-1091 Telephone 510.337.1001 Fax 510.337.1023 6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 1 2 3 4 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 PAUL BENSI, BART FLORENCE, JERRY ) KALMAR, and LYLE SETTER, in their ) capacities as Trustees of the STATIONARY ) ENGINEERS LOCAL 39 PENSION TRUST ) FUND; STATIONARY ENGINEERS LOCAL ) 39 HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND; ) and STATIONARY ENGINEERS LOCAL 39 ) ANNUITY TRUST FUND, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) LITKE PROPERTIES, INC., a California ) Corporation, ) ) Defendant. ) ) No. C 11-03875 EMC STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT TO ANSWER COMPLAINT ; ORDER 21 22 Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12, and Local Rule 6-1(a), Plaintiffs and 23 Defendant hereby stipulate to extend the time within which Defendant has to answer or otherwise 24 respond to the Complaint. 25 Plaintiffs filed the Complaint in this action on or around August 8, 2011, and Defendant 26 was served with the Complaint and Summons on or around August 26, 2011. On September 2, 27 2011, the Parties submitted a Stipulation to Extend Deadline for Defendant to Answer Complaint 28 (“Stipulation”) extending Defendant’s deadline to respond to the Complaint to September 30, WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD A Professional Corporation 1001 Marina Village Parkway Suite 200 Alameda, CA 94501-1091 510.337.1001 Stipulation to Extend Deadline for Defendant to Answer Complaint (Case No. 11-03875 EMC) 1 2011. The Court so Ordered the Stipulation on September 16, 2011. Defendant has now retained 2 new counsel, the Abraham Law Offices, to represent them in this action, who needs additional time 3 to familiarize himself with the pending action prior to filing an answer. With this stipulation, 4 Defendant’s deadline for answering and or otherwise responding to the Complaint is extended to 5 December 2, 2011. 6 The parties submit that the additional time will not alter any deadline set by the Court, and 7 agree that pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), this stipulation is respectfully submitted to the Court for 8 approval without the necessity of a hearing or Order. 9 10 Dated: November 17, 2011 WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD A Professional Corporation 11 12 By: /s/ Ezekiel D. Carder WILLIAM A. SOKOL LINDA BALDWIN JONES EZEKIEL D. CARDER Attorneys for Plaintiffs 13 14 15 16 Dated: November 17, 2011 ABRAHAM LAW OFFICES 17 18 By: /s/ A.K. Abraham A.K. ABRAHAM Attorneys for Defendant 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED: S H ER FO RT 26 R NIA ________________SO ORDERED IT IS Edward M. Chen Chen U.S. District Judgedge Edward M. Ju NO 25 UNIT ED 24 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O 23 LI 22 128627/644701 A 21 N F D IS T IC T O R C 27 28 WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD A Professional Corporation 1001 Marina Village Parkway Suite 200 Alameda, CA 94501-1091 510.337.1001 -2Stipulation to Extend Deadline for Defendant to Answer Complaint (Case No. 11-03875 EMC) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 2 3 4 5 I am a citizen of the United States and an employee in the County of Alameda, State of California. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within action; my business address is 1001 Marina Village Parkway, Suite 200, Alameda, California 94501-1091. On November 17, 2011, I served upon the following parties in this action: 6 A.K. Abraham Abraham Law Offices 155 Bovet Road Suite 780 San Mateo, CA 94402 7 8 9 10 copies of the document(s) described as: STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT TO ANSWER COMPLAINT 11 12 13 [X] BY MAIL I placed a true copy of each document listed herein in a sealed envelope, addressed as indicated herein, and caused each such envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid, to be placed in the United States mail at Alameda, California. I am readily familiar with the practice of Weinberg, Roger & Rosenfeld for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing, said practice being that in the ordinary course of business, mail is deposited in the United States Postal Service the same day as it is placed for collection. [] BY PERSONAL SERVICE I placed a true copy of each document listed herein in a sealed envelope, addressed as indicated herein, and caused the same to be delivered by hand to the offices of each addressee. [] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY SERVICE I placed a true copy of each document listed herein in a sealed envelope, addressed as indicated herein, and placed the same for collection by Overnight Delivery Service by following the ordinary business practices of Weinberg, Roger & Rosenfeld, Alameda, California. I am readily familiar with the practice of Weinberg, Roger & Rosenfeld for collection and processing of Overnight Delivery Service correspondence, said practice being that in the ordinary course of business, Overnight Delivery Service correspondence is deposited at the Overnight Delivery Service offices for next day delivery the same day as Overnight Delivery Service correspondence is placed for collection. [] BY FACSIMILE I caused to be transmitted each document listed herein via the fax number(s) listed above or on the attached service list. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD A Professional Corporation 1001 Marina Village Parkway Suite 200 Alameda, CA 94501-1091 510.337.1001 I certify under penalty of perjury that the above is true and correct. Executed at Alameda, California, on November 17, 2011. /s/ Joanna Son Joanna Son -3Stipulation to Extend Deadline for Defendant to Answer Complaint (Case No. 11-03875 EMC)

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?