Montoya v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company et al

Filing 117

ORDER EXTENDING TIME granting 116 STIPULATION- Reply in support of 109 MOTION for Attorney Fees due by 5/3/2017. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 05/03/2017. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/3/2017)

1
2
3
4
5

LAURENCE F. PADWAY (SBN 83914)
Email: [e-mail]
LAW OFFICES OF LAURENCE F. PADWAY
1516 Oak Street, Suite 109
Alameda, California 94501
Telephone: [phone]
Fax:
[phone]
Attorney for Plaintiff
MARLON MONTOYA

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

DENNIS J. RHODES (SBN 168417)
Email: [e-mail]
WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ,
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
525 Market Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, California 94105
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants
RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY and THE RSL
GROUP AND BLANKET TRUST

14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MARLON MONTOYA,
) CASE NO. 3:14-cv-02740-WHO
)
Plaintiff,
) STIPULATION FOR AN ORDER
) PERMITTING THE LATE FILING OF
v.
) PLAINTIFF=S REPLY BRIEF RE
) MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS;
RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE
) ORDER THEREON
INSURANCE COMPANY, THE RSL
)
GROUP AND BLANKET TRUST,
)
)
) Action Filed: June 13, 2014
Defendants
)
)
)
)
)
Pursuant to the Court’s order of April 17, 2017, plaintiff’s reply brief in support of his motion
for fees was due on May 1, 2017;

27
28

STIPULATION FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING THE LATE FILING OF PLAINTIFF’S REPLY BRIEF RE
MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS; ORDER
USDC Northern District Court Case No. 3:14-cv-02740-WHO

1

Counsel for plaintiff undersigned had estimated that the reply brief would take 8 hours to

2

complete. However, counsel undersigned has found this brief to require far more time than

3

anticipated. As of Friday, April 29, plaintiff=s counsel anticipated a timely filing of the reply brief,

4

and he spent 10.7 hours working on the brief over the weekend to ensure that he would have

5

adequate time to complete it on Monday morning. On Monday, May 1, counsel began working on

6

the brief at 5:30 a.m. Counsel was still working on the brief in the late afternoon, and on review of

7

the brief at the end of the day, counsel decided to strike and re-write whole sections of it. At 11:30

8

p.m., last night, counsel realized the brief would not be ready for filing by midnight, despite having

9

devoted approximately 30 hours to it. Counsel is continuing to work on the brief today, and

10

anticipates having the full day available with the exception of a medical appointment and one

11

conference call. Counsel expects to have the brief ready for filing late today, but in an abundance of

12

caution, plaintiff=s counsel requests that he be allowed to file the brief no later than Wednesday, May

13

3, 2017, two weeks before the hearing on the motion, which is scheduled for May 17.

14
15

The parties have met and conferred, and defendants have no objection to the late filing of Mr.
Montoya=s reply brief.

16
17
18

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Dated: May 2, 2017

LAW OFFICES OF LAURENCE F. PADWAY
By: /s/Laurence F. Padway
LAURENCE F. PADWAY
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MARLON MONTOYA

19
20
21
22
Dated: May 2, 2017
23
24
25
26
27
28

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ,
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
By: /s/Dennis J. Rhodes
DENNIS J. RHODES
Attorneys for Defendants
RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY and THE RSL
GROUP AND BLANKET TRUST

STIPULATION FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING THE LATE FILING OF PLAINTIFF’S REPLY
BRIEF RE MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS; ORDER
USDC Northern District Court Case No. 3:14-cv-02740-WHO
1

1
2
3

ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45
I, Laurence F. Padway, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been
obtained from the other Signatory.

4
5

Dated: May 2, 2017

6

/S/ Laurence F. Padway
LAURENCE F. PADWAY

7

Attorneys for Plaintiff

8
9
10
11

ORDER EXTENDING TIME
Good cause appearing, it is ordered that plaintiff may file his reply brief in
support of plaintiff=s motion for fees may be filed no later than May 3, 2017.

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16

Date:May 3, 2017

By:
HONORABLE WILLIAM H. ORRICK
UNITED STATED DISTRICT JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING THE LATE FILING OF PLAINTIFF’S REPLY
BRIEF RE MOTION FOR FEES AND COSTS; ORDER
USDC Northern District Court Case No. 3:14-cv-02740-WHO
2