Cao et al v. U.S. Bancorp, N.A. et al

Filing 10

STIPULATION AND ORDER Granting Extension of Time to Respond to Initial Complaint re 9 Stipulation. Defendants U.S. Bancorp, N.A., Richard K Davis response due 9/24/2010. Signed by Judge James Ware on 9/10/2010. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/10/2010)

Download PDF
Cao et al v. U.S. Bancorp, N.A. et al Doc. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 WENDY M. GARBERS (CA SBN 213208) WGarbers@mofo.com BORIS YANKILOVICH (CA SBN 257887) BYankilovich@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: 415.268.7000 Facsimile: 415.268.7522 Attorneys for Defendant U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (erroneously named as U.S. Bancorp, N.A.) and RICHARD K. DAVIS UNIT ED S ISTRIC ES D TC AT T UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ER N NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION F D IS T IC T O R 9/10/2010 ZHIQIANG CAO, an individual, ANTHONY AND RACHEL SANDERS, individuals, BIBAK PRASAD, an individual, BALTEJ S. CHAHAL, an individual, ELZA WALTERS, JR., an individual, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, Case No. CV 10-03027 JW Class Action STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL COMPLAINT 17 v. 18 19 20 Defendants. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT CV 10-03027 JW sf-2893471 Dockets.Justia.com Judge: Hon. James Ware U.S. BANCORP, N.A. a National Corporation, RICHARD K. DAVIS, an individual, and DOES 1-10, Complaint Filed: July 9, 2010 A C LI FO mes Wa Judge Ja re R NIA OO IT IS S D RDERE RT U O NO RT H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 6-1(a), it is hereby stipulated by and between plaintiffs Zhiqiang Cao, Anthony and Rachel Sanders, Bibak Prasad, Baltej S. Chahal, Elza Walters, Jr. and defendants U.S. Bank National Association and Richard K. Davis, through their respective attorneys, that the defendants shall have until and including September 24, 2010 to answer or otherwise respond to plaintiffs' complaint. The parties have previously stipulated that the defendants would have until September 10, 2010 to respond to the complaint. (Dkt. 4.) This current stipulated extension does not alter the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court order. Dated: September 9, 2010 WENDY M. GARBERS BORIS YANKILOVICH MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP By: /s/ Wendy M. Garbers WENDY M. GARBERS Attorneys for Defendants U.S. BANCORP, N.A. and RICHARD K. DAVIS Dated: September 9, 2010 JESSICA E. RAUFF THE LAW OFFICE OF JESSICA E. RAUFF By: /s/ Jessica E. Rauff JESSICA E. RAUFF Attorneys for Plaintiffs ZHIQIANG CAO, ANTHONY AND RACHEL SANDERS, BIBAK PRASAD, BALTEJ S. CHAHAL, and, ELZA WALTERS, JR., et al. ECF CERTIFICATION Pursuant to General Order No. 45, X.B., the filing attorney attests that she has obtained concurrence regarding the filing of this document from the signatories to the document. Dated: September 9, 2010 By: /s/ Wendy M. Garbers Wendy M. Garbers Attorneys for Defendants STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT CV 10-03027 JW sf-2893471 1

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?