DMP ERSB LLC v. Longwood San Benito LLC et al

Filing 32

STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint by re 31 Stipulation; Finding as MOOT 30 Stipulation. Deadline to respond by 6/1/2010. Signed by Judge James Ware on 3/1/2010. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2010)

Download PDF
1 RICHARD R. PATCH (State Bar No. 88049) BRIAN J. SCHMIDT (State Bar No. 265937) 2 COBLENTZ, PATCH, DUFFY & BASS LLP One Ferry Building, Suite 200 3 San Francisco, California 94111-4213 Telephone: 415.391.4800 4 Facsimile: 415.989.1663 Email: ef-rrp@cpdb.com ef-bjs@cpdb.com 5 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant DMB ERSB LLC 7 and Cross-Defendants DMB REALCO, LLC, DMB COMMUNITIES, LLC, 8 and DMB COMMUNITIES II, LLC 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION Case No. CV 09-02003 JW STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR NOMINAL DEFENDANT EL RANCHO SAN BENITO LLC TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (N.D. CAL. CIV. L.R. 6-1(a)) COBLENTZ, PATCH, DUFFY & BASS LLP ONE FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 200, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 415.391.4800 FAX 415.989.1663 94111-4213 11 DMB ERSB LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 LONGWOOD SAN BENITO LLC, a California limited liability company, 15 Defendant. 16 and 17 EL RANCHO SAN BENITO LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, 18 Nominal Defendant. 19 20 LONGWOOD SAN BENITO LLC, a California limited liability company, 21 Cross-Complainant, 22 v. 23 DMB REALCO, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, DMB COMMUNITIES 24 LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, DMB COMMUNITIES II LLC, an Arizona 25 limited liability company, DMB ERSB LLC, an Arizona limited liability company, and 26 DOES 1-50, 27 28 13703.003.1364658v1 Cross-Defendants. 1 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR EL RANCHO SAN BENITO LLC TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT CV 09-02003 JW 1 2 3 STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR NOMINAL DEFENDANT EL RANCHO SAN BENITO TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (N.D. CAL. CIV. L.R. 6-1(a)) Pursuant to the Northern District of California's Civil Local Rule 6-1(a), and without 4 either party admitting that the other is the Managing Member of Nominal Defendant EL 5 RANCHO SAN BENITO LLC ("ERSB"), IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by 6 and between Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant DMB ERSB LLC ("DMB ERSB") and Defendant and 94111-4213 7 Cross-Complainant LONGWOOD SAN BENITO LLC ("Longwood"), on behalf of themselves 8 and with respect to their respective positions and interests as the only members in ERSB, and by 9 and through their undersigned counsel, that ERSB's time to answer, move against, or otherwise 10 respond to DMB ERSB's Complaint (filed on May 6, 2009 [Docket No. 1] and served on ERSB 11 on Aug. 21, 2009 [Docket No. 15]) is hereby extended up to and including June 1, 2010. This 12 stipulation has no effect on the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court order. 13 IT IS SO STIPULATED. COBLENTZ, PATCH, DUFFY & BASS LLP By: /s/ Brian J. Schmidt Brian J. Schmidt Attorney for Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant DMB ERSB LLC and Cross-Defendants DMB REALCO, LLC, DMB COMMUNITIES, LLC, and DMB COMMUNITIES II, LLC COBLENTZ, PATCH, DUFFY & BASS LLP ONE FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 200, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 415.391.4800 FAX 415.989.1663 14 DATED: February 24, 2010 15 16 17 18 19 20 DATED: February 25, 2010 21 22 23 24 DLA PIPER LLP (US) By: /s/ Margaret A. Crawford Matthew S. Covington Margaret A. Crawford Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant LONGWOOD SAN BENITO LLC I, Brian J. Schmidt, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file this 25 Stipulation. Pursuant to General Order 45, I hereby attest that Margaret A. Crawford has concurred in this filing. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED: 27 The previous stipulation (Docket Item No. 30 to continue is found as MOOT. 28 Dated: .March11, 2010 13703.003 1364658v 2 _______________________ JW CV 09-02003 United States District Judge STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR EL RANCHO SAN BENITO LLC TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

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?