Levy v. Prevacus, Inc.

Filing 40

ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore granting Defendants' 34 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Defendants' response is due by 3/25/2017. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DANIEL E. LEVY, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 v. PREVACUS, INC., et al., Defendants. Case No. 4:16-cv-01555-KAW ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Re: Dkt. No. 34 12 On February 9, 2017, Defendant Jacob W. VanLandingham requested a 45 day extension 13 of time, until March 25, 2017, to respond to Plaintiff’s first amended complaint in order to obtain 14 new counsel. (Dkt. No. 34 at 7.) The Court notes that Mr. VanLandingham also requested to 15 extend the time to respond on behalf of his corporation Prevacus, Inc., which he understands must 16 be represented by counsel. 17 Plaintiff Daniel E. Levy opposed the 45 day extension, but agreed to a final two -week 18 extension until March 1, 2017. (See Pl.’s Opp’n, Dkt. No. 38 at 3.) While the Court sympathizes 19 with Plaintiff’s frustration regarding Defendants’ seven month delay in obtaining counsel, the 20 Court will GRANT the 45 day extension, as there is sufficient time for the parties to prepare for 21 the initial case management conference on April 25, 2017. 22 Defendants are advised that the Court will not permit any further extensions absent good 23 cause. Accordingly, should Defendants not obtain counsel before the March 25, 2017 deadline to 24 respond, Plaintiff may go forward with default proceedings against the corporate defendant. 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 1, 2017 __________________________________ KANDIS A. WESTMORE United States Magistrate Judge

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?