David Strong v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al
Filing
18
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 17 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)
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
DAVID STRONG,
13
14
15
16
17
Plaintiff,
v.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,
INC.; ET AL.,
Case No. 3:17-cv-00503-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-00503-RS
1
On January 31, 2017, Plaintiff David Strong (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint in this action.
2
Given the large volume of Complaints requiring a response from Defendant Experian Information
3
Solutions, Inc. (“Experian”) at the same time, and in accordance with Local Rule 6-1(a), Plaintiff
4
and Experian agree to an extension for Experian to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint.
5
Experian’s response to the Complaint is due April 3, 2017. To the extent that Experian files a
6
motion to dismiss in this case, Experian agrees that Plaintiff shall have 30 days to respond.
7
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
David Strong
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-00503-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-00503-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
DATED: __________________________
3/3/17
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-00503-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?