Vazquez v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 14

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 13 for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 3/3/17. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/3/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 Benjamin C. Lee (SBN 282177) blee@jonesday.com JONES DAY 555 California Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 626-3939 Facsimile: (415) 875-5700 5 6 Attorneys for Defendant EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC. 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 12 VICTOR VAZQUEZ, 13 14 15 16 17 Plaintiff, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; ET AL., Case No. 3:17-cv-00424-RS Assigned to: Judge Richard Seeborg JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT Defendants. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-00424-RS 1 On January 26, 2017, Plaintiff Victor Vazquez (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint in this 2 action. Given the large volume of Complaints requiring a response from Defendant Experian 3 Information Solutions, Inc. (“Experian”) at the same time, and in accordance with Local Rule 6- 4 1(a), Plaintiff and Experian agree to an extension for Experian to answer or otherwise respond to 5 the Complaint. Experian’s response to the Complaint is due April 3, 2017. To the extent that 6 Experian files a motion to dismiss in this case, Experian agrees that Plaintiff shall have 30 days to 7 respond. Experian will thereupon have 21 days for any reply. 8 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff and Experian, that the deadline for Experian to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint is extended until April 10 3, 2017. Plaintiff’s deadline to respond to any motion to dismiss is extended to 30 days from 11 filing, and Experian’s deadline to reply in support of a motion to dismiss is extended to 21 days 12 from filing the opposition. 13 14 Dated: March 2, 2017 15 16 17 18 Attorneys for Plaintiff Victor Vazquez 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 /s/ Elliot W. Gale Elliot W. Gale (SBN 263326) SAGARIA LAW, P.C. 2033 Gateway Place, 5th Floor San Jose, CA 95110 Tele.: (408) 279-2288 Fax: (408) 279-2299 Email: egale@sagarialaw.com Dated: March 2, 2017 /s/ Benjamin C. Lee Benjamin C. Lee (SBN 282177) JONES DAY 555 California Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 626-3939 Facsimile: (415) 875-5700 Email: blee@jonesday.com Attorneys for Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. 26 27 28 -1- JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-00424-RS 1 2 ECF CERTIFICATION I, Benjamin C. Lee, hereby attest pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3) that the concurrence to 3 the filing of this document has been obtained from each signatory hereto. 4 Executed on March 2, 2017, at San Francisco, California. 5 6 7 8 /s/ Benjamin C. Lee Benjamin C. Lee (SBN 282177) JONES DAY Attorneys for Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-00424-RS 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 The Court, having considered the parties’ Joint Stipulation for Extension of Time to 3 Respond to the Complaint, hereby extends Experian Information Solutions, Inc.’s (“Experian”) 4 deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint to April 3, 2017. Plaintiff’s deadline to 5 respond to any motion to dismiss is extended to 30 days from filing, and Experian’s deadline to 6 reply in support of a motion to dismiss is extended to 21 days from filing the opposition. 7 PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 10 3/3/17 DATED: __________________________ The Honorable Judge Richard Seeborg 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT Case No. 3:17-cv-00424-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?