Watchous Enterprises, L.L.C. v. Pacific National Capital et al

Filing 115

ORDER granting 114 Motion for Extension of Time to File. For good cause shown, it is ordered that Defendants Pacific National Capital Corporation, Charles A. Elfsten, and Mark M. Hasegawa be and hereby are granted an additional fourteen (14) day s' time, through March 16, 2018, to respond to 109 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint. Additionally, for good cause shown it is ordered that Defendant Pacific National Capital Corporation be and hereby is grante d an additional fourteen (14) days' time, through March 16, 2018, to reply in support of its 101 Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and to reply in support of its Rule56(d) Motion to Defer Ruling on the Plaintiff's Motion for Parti al Summary Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge James P. O'Hara on 2/27/2018. Mailed to pro se parties, Waterfall Mountain USA LLC, Waterfall Mountain LLC,Waterfall International Holdings Limited, William J. Mournes, and Gordon W. Duval by regular mail. (ydm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
WATCHOUS ENTERPRISES, L.L.C.,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 16-1432-JTM

vs.
PACIFIC NATIONAL CAPITAL,
WATERFALL MOUNTAIN USA LLC,
and WATERFALL MOUNTAIN LLC,
WATERFALL INTERNATIONAL
HOLDINGS LIMITED, WILLIAM J.
MOURNES, GORDON W. DUVAL,
CHARLES A. ELFSTEN, MARK M.
HASEGAWA, and MARK S. ZOUVAS,
Defendants.

ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Pacific National Capital
Corporation’s, Charles A. Elfsten’s, and Mark M. Hasegawa’s Unopposed Motion for
Extension of Time (ECF No. 114). For good cause shown, it is ordered that
Defendants Pacific National Capital Corporation, Charles A. Elfsten, and Mark M.
Hasegawa be and hereby are granted an additional fourteen (14) days’ time,
through March 16, 2018, to respond to Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Second
Amended Complaint (ECF No. 109). Additionally, for good cause shown it is ordered
that Defendant Pacific National Capital Corporation be and hereby is granted an
additional fourteen (14) days’ time, through March 16, 2018, to reply in support of
its Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and to reply in support of its Rule

56(d) Motion to Defer Ruling on the Plaintiff’s Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment (ECF Nos. 101 and 102)
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated February 27, 2018, in Kansas City, Kansas.
s/ James P. O’Hara
James P. O’Hara
U.S. Magistrate Judge