Rovai v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
Filing
91
ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Answer (ECF No. 89 ). The Court finds that there is good cause insofar as the parties request an extension of time for Defendant to respond to the SAC. Defendant shall respond to the SAC no later than 8/23/2018. To the extent the parties intended to request that the Court adopt the briefing schedule identified in the motion as part of this order, the Court does not find there is good cause to do so and denies the motion to that extent. Signed by Judge Cynthia Bashant on 8/1/2018. (jdt)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ADRIANA ROVAI,
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
15
16
Case No. 14-cv-1738-BAS-WVG
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
AND DENYING IN PART JOINT
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME
v.
SELECT PORTFOLIO
SERVICING, INC.,
[ECF No. 89]
Defendant.
17
The parties have jointly moved to extend the time for Defendant to respond to
18
the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) from August 2, 2018 to August 23, 2018.
19
(ECF No. 89.) The parties in Pemberton have also filed a similar stipulation, which
20
requests an extension of time for the Defendant to respond to the SAC in that case
21
to August 23, 2018. See Pemberton v. Nationstar Mortgage LC, No. 14-cv-1024-
22
BAS-WVG, No. 14-cv-1024-BAS-WVG, ECF No. 78 (S.D. Cal. July 31, 2018).
23
The aim of the parties is to establish “the same briefing schedule” in both cases “to
24
allow Rovai to file a single response to any motion(s) to dismiss.” (ECF No. 89 at
25
2.) In the event that Defendant moves to dismiss a third time, the parties have also
26
jointly stipulated to a briefing schedule.
27
Having considered the motion, the Court finds that there is good cause insofar
28
as the parties request an extension of time for Defendant to respond to the SAC.
–1–
14cv1738
1
Defendant shall respond to the SAC no later than August 23, 2018. Given the
2
length of time this case has been pending at the pleading stage, no further extensions
3
will be granted.
4
To the extent the parties intended to request that the Court adopt the briefing
5
schedule identified in the motion as part of this order, the Court does not find there
6
is good cause to do so and DENIES the motion to that extent. It is speculative
7
whether Defendant will move to dismiss and the Court will not issue a schedule that
8
may not be necessary. In the event that Defendant does move, the parties are free to
9
advise the Court of a stipulated briefing schedule and request court approval at that
10
11
point.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
12
13
DATED: August 1, 2018
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
–2–
14cv1738
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?