Heim v. The Estate of Donald T. Heim, Maxine Heim et al

Filing 86

STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING SECOND STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT AND PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT re 82 Stipulation. The Multimatic Entities shall have until August 15, 2011, to respond to the Second Amended Third Party Complaint and First Amended Complaint of MAXINE HEIM and MARK HEIM, respectively. This extension will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already fixed by Court order. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 8/2/2011. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/2/2011)

8

S

Attorneys for Defendants and Third Party Defendants
MULTIMATIC LLC and THE KIRRBERG CORPORATION,
formerly known as Multimatic Corporation, successor by merger
with Multimatic Dry Cleaning Machine Corporation

9

ER

R NIA

J . D av i l

a

FO

d w a rd
J u d ge E

H

7

RT

6

NO

5

LI

4

D
RDERE

OO
IT IS S

A

3

UNIT
ED

2

RICHARD A. DONGELL (SBN 128083)
([e-mail])
THOMAS F. VANDENBURG (SBN 163446)
([e-mail])
IAN P. CULVER (SBN 245106)
([e-mail])
DONGELL LAWRENCE FINNEY LLP
707 Wilshire Boulevard, 45th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017-3609
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

RT
U
O

1

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

C
F
D IS T IC T O
R
8/2/2011

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SAN JOSE

11
12

MARK HEIM,

Honorable Edward J. Davila

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Case No.: 5:10-CV-03816 EJD

Plaintiff,
v.
THE ESTATE OF DONALD T. HEIM;
MAXINE HEIM; PROJECT ONE, a California
Limited Partnership; WILLIAM
BURGSTROM; ESTATE OF ERNIE WEBB;
CITY OF WATSONVILLE; MULTIMATIC
DRY CLEANING MACHINE
CORPORATION; MULTIMATIC
CORPORATION, as successor in interest to
Multimatic Dry Cleaning Machine Corporation;
MULTIMATIC LLC, a New Jersey Limited
Liability Company, as successor in interest to
Multimatic Corporation and Multimatic Dry
Cleaning Machine Corporation; THE
KIRRBERG CORPORATION, a New Jersey
Corporation, formerly known as Multimatic
Corporation; AMERICAN LAUNDRY
MACHINERY INC.; and DOES 1 through 20;

SECOND STIPULATION EXTENDING
TIME OF MULTIMATIC DRY
CLEANING MACHINE
CORPORATION, MULTIMATIC
CORPORATION, MULTIMATIC LLC,
AND THE KIRRBERG CORPORATION
TO RESPOND TO MAXINE HEIM’S
SECOND AMENDED THIRD PARTY
COMPLAINT AND MARK HEIM’S
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
Local Rule 6-1(a)

24
25
26
27

Defendants.
AND RELATED ACTIONS.

ACTION FILED:
TRIAL DATE:

August 26, 2010
None Set

28
1
SECOND LOCAL RULE 6-1(a) STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME
TO RESPOND TO AMENDED PLEADINGS

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(a), Third Party Plaintiff MAXINE HEIM, Plaintiff

1
2

MARK HEIM and nominal Defendants and Third Party Defendants MULTIMATIC DRY

3

CLEANING MACHINE CORPORATION, MULTIMATIC CORPORATION, MULTIMATIC

4

LLC, and THE KIRRBERG CORPORATION (together the “Multimatic Entities”), by and

5

through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate that the Multimatic Entities shall have until

6

August 15, 2011, to respond to the Second Amended Third Party Complaint and First Amended

7

Complaint of MAXINE HEIM and MARK HEIM, respectively.
This extension will not alter the date of any event or any deadline already fixed by

8
9
10

Court order.
SO STIPULATED.

11
12

DATED: August 1, 2011

DONGELL LAWRENCE FINNEY LLP

13
By: _/s/ Ian P. Culver________________________
Ian P. Culver
Attorneys for Third Party Defendants
MULTIMATIC LLC and THE KIRRBERG
CORPORATION, formerly known as Multimatic
Corporation

14
15
16
17
18
19

DATED: August 1, 2011

GREBEN & ASSOCIATES

20
By: _/s/ Danielle DeSmeth____________________
Danielle DeSmeth
Attorneys for Third Party Plaintiff
MAXINE HEIM

21
22
23
24
25

DATED: August 1, 2011

LAW OFFICES OF MARTIN DEUTSCH

26
27
28
1414-038/63901

By: _/s/ Sosan Akbar ____________________
Sosan Akbar
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MARK HEIM
2
SECOND LOCAL RULE 6-1(a) STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME
TO RESPOND TO AMENDED PLEADINGS