Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc. et al
Filing
64
ORDER by Judge Richard Seeborg granting 59 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney; granting 63 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/11/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION
BUREAU,
Plaintiff,
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
Case No. 15-cv-02106-RS
v.
NATIONWIDE BIWEEKLY
ADMINISTRATION, INC., et al.,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
WITHDRAW AND EXTENDING
BRIEFING AND HEARING ON
MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendants.
15
16
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b) the unopposed motion of Glenn V. Whitaker, Eric W.
17
Richardson and Nathan L. Colvin, of Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease, LLP to withdraw as
18
counsel for Defendants Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc., Loan Payment Administration,
19
LLC, and Daniel S. Lipsky is suitable for disposition without oral argument and the hearing set for
20
February 4, 2016 is vacated. Good cause appearing, the motion is granted. Defendants shall
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
continue to be represented in this action by Sean E. Ponist of the Law Office of Sean Ponist, P.C.,
and Allyson Baker of Venable, LLP.
Defendants’ unopposed motion to extend the briefing schedule on plaintiff’s motion to
strike affirmative defenses is granted. Opposition shall be due on January, 21, 2016, and any reply
must be filed by January 28, 2016. The hearing is hereby continued to February 11, 2016. In the
event that motion is taken under submission without oral argument, further notice will be given
vacating the hearing.
1
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
3
4
5
Dated: January 11, 2016
______________________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CASE NO.
2
15-cv-02106-RS
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?