Diamond Real Estate et al v. American Brokers Conduit et al
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. GRANTING 50 EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE DECLARATION. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/28/2016)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DIAMOND REAL ESTATE, et al.,
Case No. 16-cv-03937-HSG
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE DECLARATION
AMERICAN BROKERS CONDUIT, et al.,
Re: Dkt. No. 50
United States District Court
Northern District of California
On November 17, 2016, the Court ordered corporate Plaintiff Diamond Real Estate
(“Diamond”) to file a declaration stating that it had hired counsel no later than December 16,
2016. Dkt. No. 47; see also U.S. v. High Country Broad. Co., Inc., 3 F.3d 1244, 1245 (9th Cir.
1993) (“A corporation may appear in federal court only through licensed counsel.”); Civil L.R. 3-
9(b) (“A corporation, unincorporated association, partnership or other such entity may appear only
through a member of the bar of this Court.”). On December 16, 2016, Diamond filed a motion for
a twenty-day extension of time to file the declaration stating that it has hired counsel. Dkt. No. 50.
The Court hereby GRANTS the motion for extension of time.1 Diamond must file the declaration
no later than January 5, 2016.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge
The Court notes, however, that Diamond’s motion did not fully comply with the Local Rules.
See Civil L.R. 6-3(a)(2)-(3) (listing two of the requirements for the form and content of a motion
to change time, which were not satisfied by Diamond). The Court urges Diamond to review the
Local Rules more closely with relation to future filings.
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?