Ledesma v. Trans Union, LLC et al

Filing 18

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh granting 17 Stipulation.(lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/22/2012)

Case5:12-cv-00495-LHK Document17 Filed03/21/12 Page1 of 3

1 TOMIO B. NARITA (SBN 156576)

[e-mail]
2 R. TRAVIS CAMPBELL (SBN 271580)

[e-mail]
3 SIMMONDS & NARITA LLP

44 Montgomery Street, Suite 3010
4 San Francisco, CA 94104-4816

Telephone: [phone]
5 Facsimile: [phone]

[e-mail]
6 [e-mail]
7 Attorneys for defendant

Midland Credit Management, Inc.,
8 erroneously sued as Midland Credit

Management
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12

SAN JOSE DIVISION
13
14

ROSA ISELA LEDESMA,

15

Plaintiff,

16

vs.

17
18
19
20

TRANS UNION LLC; MIDLAND
CREDIT MANAGEMENT,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. CV12-00495-LHK
SECOND STIPULATION TO
EXTEND DEFENDANT MIDLAND
CREDIT MANAGEMENT’S TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
Complaint Served: February 16, 2012
Current Response Date: March 22, 2012
New Response Date: April 5, 2012

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LEDESMA V. TRANS UNION LLC, ET AL. (CASE NO.: CV12-00495-HRL)
SECOND STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

Case5:12-cv-00495-LHK Document17 Filed03/21/12 Page2 of 3

1

WHEREAS the Complaint in this action was filed on January 31, 2012;

2

WHEREAS Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. (“Defendant”) was

3 served with the Complaint on February 16, 2012;
4

WHEREAS Defendant’s response to the Complaint was due on March 8, 2012;

5

WHEREAS the parties stipulated to, and the Court granted, an extension of

6 time for Defendant to respond to the Complaint up to and including March 22, 2012;
7

WHEREAS the Complaint references a document that is attached thereto as

8 Exhibit A (See Complaint ¶ 8);
9

WHEREAS the Complaint Defendant received did not contain a document

10 attached thereto as Exhibit A;
11

WHEREAS on March 16, 2012, Defendant requested that Plaintiff provide a

12 copy of the document referenced in the Complaint as Exhibit A;
13

WHEREAS On March 19, 2012, Plaintiff provided Defendant a copy of the

14 document referenced in the Complaint as Exhibit A;
15

WHEREAS Defendant requires additional time to review Exhibit A and

16 investigate the claims asserted in the Complaint;
17

WHEREAS Plaintiff has agreed to grant Defendant an extension of time to

18 respond to the Complaint up to and including April 5, 2012;
19

WHEREAS on March 19, 2012, the Court issued an Order reassigning the case

20 to the Honorable Lucy K. Koh and vacating all matter presently scheduled for
21 hearing;
22

WHEREAS as of the filing of this stipulation, this Court has not issued an

23 Order setting an initial case management conference;
24

WHEREAS the requested extension of time will have no effect on the case

25 schedule,
26

THEREFORE plaintiff Rosa Isela Ledesma and defendant Midland Credit

27 Management, Inc., by and through their counsel, hereby stipulate and agree pursuant
28
LEDESMA V. TRANS UNION LLC, ET AL. (CASE NO.: CV12-00495-HRL)
SECOND STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

1

Case5:12-cv-00495-LHK Document17 Filed03/21/12 Page3 of 3

1 to Local Rule 6-1(a), that Defendant may have up to and including April 5, 2012, to
2 answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint filed in this action.
3 IT IS SO STIPULATED.
4
5
6

DATED: March 21, 2012

7
8

SIMMONDS & NARITA LLP
TOMIO B. NARITA
R. TRAVIS CAMPBELL
By:

9
10

s/R. Travis Campbell
R. Travis Campbell
Attorneys for Defendant
Midland Credit Management, Inc., erroneously
sued as Midland Credit Management

11
12

DATED: March 21, 2012

13

STEBURG LAW FIRM
ANITA STEBURG

14

By:

15

s/Anita Steburg
Anita Steburg
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Rosa Isela Ledesma

16
17

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

18
19
20

DATED:

March 22, 2012

Hon. Lucy K. Koh
U.S. District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LEDESMA V. TRANS UNION LLC, ET AL. (CASE NO.: CV12-00495-HRL)
SECOND STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

2