Nelson et al v. Levy et al
Filing
30
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FILE OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS AND ORDER. 1. Plaintiffs will have until August 29, 2016 to file their opposition to Jacobson's Motion to Dismiss. Defendant will have until September 12, 2016 to file a Reply. 2. The hearing on the motion to dismiss is continued to September 30, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on August 22, 2016. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/22/2016)
1
2
3
4
5
ABRAHAM M. GEORGE (Pro Hac Vice)
New York State Bar No. 4272258
LAW OFFICE OF ABRAHAM GEORGE, P.C.
44 Wall Street, 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10005
Tel: 212-498-9803
Fax: 646-558-7533
E-mail: abegeorgenyc@gmail.com
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
D. GILL SPERLEIN
THE LAW OFFICE OF D. GILL SPERLEIN
345 Grove Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
Tel: 415-404-6615
Fax: 415-404-6616
E-mail: gill@sperleinlaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiffs
Leslee A. Nelson et al and Nancy Barth
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
)
LESLEE A. NELSON individually and as
)
Trustee and Trustor of the LESLEE A.
)
NELSON REVOCABLE TRUST and
)
NANCY BARTH,
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
RAYAH LEVY, JESSICA JACOBSON,
)
RAYAH RACHEL LEVY
INTERNATIONAL d/b/a “ARTEQUESTA” )
)
and “AGENTS OF HUMANITY IN THE
FINE ARTS”, JOHN DOE and JANE DOES )
)
(1-10),
)
)
Defendants.
)
CASE №: 3:16-CV-3797 MMC
STIPULATION TO EXTEND
DEADLINE TO FILE OPPOSITION
TO MOTION TO DISMISS AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER]
Date: Sept. 23rd, 2016
Time: 9:00
Court Room: 7, 19th Floor
27
28
-1Leslee A. Neslon et al v. Rayah Levy, et. a
3:16-cv-3797 MMC
STIPULATION
WHEREAS, the Defendant Jessica Jacobson filed a motion to dismiss on August 8,
1
2
3
4
2016;
WHEREAS the Court continued the time and date for oral argument on that motion
for September 16, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. Dkt. No. 24;
5
6
7
8
9
WHEREAS Defendant Jessica Jacobson Plaintiff filed a notice continuing the hearing
to September 23, 2016. Dkt. No. 25; and
WHEREAS Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendant Jessica Jacobson’s motion to dismiss
would have been due on August 22, 2016;
10
11
12
13
14
THEREFORE, the Parties do hereby STIPULATE as follows,
Plaintiffs will have until August 29, 2016 to file their Opposition to Jacobson’s Motion
to Dismiss. Defendants will have until September 12, 2016 to file a Reply. See August 22,
2016 Abe George Declaration.
15
16
Defendant Jacobson maintains that Plaintiffs do not meet Justice Chesney’s rules for an
17
enlargement of time, but for the sake of judicial economy and professional courtesy
18
nonetheless stipulates to the aforesaid schedule. See August 22, 2016 Abe George
19
Declaration.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2Leslee A. Neslon et al v. Rayah Levy, et. a
3:16-cv-3797 MMC
STIPULATION
1
2
IT IS SO STIPULATED
Dated: August 22, 2016
by:
3
4
5
6
7
8
/s/ Abe George, Esq.
________________________
Abraham M. George
LAW OFFICES OF ABE GEORGE, ESQ. (pro hac vice pending)
D. Gill Sperlein
THE LAW OFFICE OF D. GILL SPERLEIN
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
9
10
11
12
13
/s/ Drew Winghart
_______________________
Drew Winghart
WINGHART LAW GROUP, INC.
Attorney for Jessica Jacobson
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3Leslee A. Neslon et al v. Rayah Levy, et. a
3:16-cv-3797 MMC
STIPULATION
1
2
3
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Having considered the stipulation of the Parties and finding good cause therefore, IT
4
5
IS SO ORDERED:
6
1. Plaintiffs will have until August 29, 2016 to file their Opposition to Jacobson’s
7
Motion to Dismiss. Defendants will have until September 12, 2016 to file a
8
9
10
11
12
13
Reply.
2. The hearing on the motion to dismiss is continued to September 30, 2016, at
9:00 a.m.
August 22, 2016
Dated: ___________
__________________________
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4Leslee A. Neslon et al v. Rayah Levy, et. a
3:16-cv-3797 MMC
STIPULATION
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?