Magee v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al

Filing 15

ORDER granting 14 Request and Stipulation to Continue Date For Defendant MUFG Union Bank, N.A.'s Response to Plaintiff's Complaint. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 11/6/2015. (ejdlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/6/2015)

S
6
7

PALMER, LOMBARDI & DONOHUE LLP
515 South Flower Street, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90071

12
13
14

R NIA

FO

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

11

LI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

10

A

H

5

RT

4

TED
Brett D. Watson, SBN: 203183
GRAN
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Chetna Vora, SBN: 223311
E-Mail: [e-mail]
a
PALMER, LOMBARDI & DONOHUE LLP
J . D av i l
E d w a rd
515 South Flower Street, Suite 2100
J u d ge
Los Angeles, California 90071
Phone: [phone]
ER
C
Fax: [phone]
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
Attorneys for Defendant MUFG Union Bank, N.A.
11/6/2015

NO

3

UNIT
ED

2

RT
U
O

1

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

KATHLEEN MAGEE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION
SOLUTIONS, INC., ET AL.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18
19

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

Case No. 15-cv-04258-EJD
[Honorable Edward J. Davila]
REQUEST AND STIPULATION TO
CONTINUE DATE FOR
DEFENDANT MUFG UNION BANK,
N.A.’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT
[New Response Date for Defendant
MUFG Union Bank, N.A.: November 16
2015]
Action Filed: August 4, 2015

20

TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN

21

DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF

22

RECORD:

23

Defendant MUFG Union Bank, N.A. (“Union Bank”) and Plaintiff Kathleen

24

Magee (“Magee”) are actively discussing settlement of this case but need additional

25

time to determine whether they can avoid further pleadings through settling the

26

action or whether a response will be necessary.

27
28

Magee filed her Complaint in state court on August 4, 2015. Defendant
Experian Information Solutions removed this case to federal court on or around
-1REQUEST AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATE FOR DEFENDANT MUFG UNION BANK,
N.A.’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

1

September 18, 2015. Magee and Union Bank stipulate that Union Bank has up to

2

and including November 16, 2015 to respond to the Complaint. This extension will

3

not alter any Court set dates. Union Bank has not waived any objection to the venue

4

or to the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the defendant, or any other

5

challenge to the Complaint or other pleadings in this case.

6
7

DATED: November 5, 2015

8

By

/s/ Brett D. Watson
BRETT D. WATSON
CHETNA VORA
PALMER, LOMBARDI & DONOHUE LLP
Attorneys for Defendant MUFG Union
Bank, N.A.

By

/s/ Elliot Gale
ELLIOT GALE
SAGARIA LAW P.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiff Kathleen Magee

9
PALMER, LOMBARDI & DONOHUE LLP
515 South Flower Street, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90071

10
11
12
13
14
15

DATED: November 5, 2015

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2REQUEST AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATE FOR DEFENDANT MUFG UNION BANK,
N.A.’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT