Birkan v. Seterus, Inc. et al
Filing
13
ORDER Granting 11 Stipulation To Extend Seterus, Inc.'s Time to Respond To Complaint. Answer due 11/4/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 10/20/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DL)
Case 2:16-cv-02060-APG-PAL Document 11 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
4
5
J Christopher Jorgensen
Nevada Bar No. 5382
LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP
3993 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 600
Las Vegas, NV 89169
Phone: (702) 474-2642
Email: cjorgensen@lrrc.com
Attorneys for Defendant
Seterus, Inc.
6
7
8
9
10
11
David H. Krieger, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 9086
HAINES & KRIEGER, LLC
8985 S. Eastern Ave., Suite 350
Henderson, NV 89123
Phone: (702) 880-5554
Email: dkrieger@hainesandkrieger.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
James Birkan
12
13
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
14
15
JAMES BIRKAN,
16
17
18
19
20
21
Case No.: 2:16-cv-02060-APG-PAL
Plaintiff,
STIPULATION TO EXTEND
DEFENDANT SETERUS, INC.’S
TIME TO RESPOND TO
COMPLAINT
vs.
SETERUS, INC.; TOYOTA FINANCIAL
SERVICES; FEDERAL NATIONAL
MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION A/K/A
FANNIE MAE; EQUIFAX
INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC;
INNOVIS DATA SOLUTIONS, INC.,
(SECOND REQUEST)
Compl. Filed: August 30, 2016
Hon. Judge Andrew P. Gordon
Hon. Mag. Judge Peggy A. Leen
Defendants.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2011122687_1
Error! Reference source not found.
1
Case 2:16-cv-02060-APG-PAL Document 11 Filed 10/18/16 Page 2 of 3
1
This is the second Stipulated Request to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint
2
made by and between Plaintiff James Birkan (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Seterus, Inc.
3
(“Seterus”) through their respective counsel. This Request is made in light of the
4
following facts:
5
RECITALS
6
7
A.
Plaintiff filed the Complaint (“Complaint”) against Seterus on or about
August 30, 2016.
8
B.
Seterus was served with the Complaint on September 19, 2016.
9
C.
The parties stipulated to extend Seterus’ time to respond to the Complaint
10
through October 21, 2016, in order to give Seterus time to investigate Plaintiff’s claims
11
and prepare a proper response, and for the parties to discuss a potential resolution of
12
this matter. Dkt. 8.
13
D.
On October 7, 2016, the Court granted the parties stipulation. Dkt. 9.
14
E.
Upon Seterus’ request, the parties agreed to further extend Seterus’ time to
15
respond to the Complaint through November 4, 2016, in order to give Seterus the
16
additional time necessary to investigate Plaintiff’s claims and prepare a proper
17
response, and for the parties to discuss a potential resolution of this matter.
18
F.
There is good cause to grant this stipulation because Seterus requires
19
additional time to investigate Plaintiff’s claims and prepare a proper response, and the
20
parties require additional time to consider a resolution of this matter.
21
G.
Pursuant to LR IA 6-1, Plaintiff and Seterus respectfully request that the
22
Court extend Seterus’ time to respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint through November 4,
23
2016.
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
2011122687_1
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT [SECOND REQUEST]
Case 2:16-cv-02060-APG-PAL Document 11 Filed 10/18/16 Page 3 of 3
1
STIPULATION
2
NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Seterus hereby stipulate and agree that
3
Seterus has up to and including November 4, 2016, to file a response to Plaintiff’s
4
Complaint.
5
IT IS SO STIPULATED
6
7
DATED: October 18, 2016
LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP
8
By: /s/ J Christopher Jorgensen
J Christopher Jorgensen
Attorneys for Defendant
Seterus, Inc.
9
10
11
12
DATED: October 18, 2016
HAINES & KRIEGER, LLC
13
14
By: /s/ David H. Krieger
David H. Krieger, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
James Birkan
15
16
17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED
19
20
21
United States Magistrate Judge
22
Dated: October 20, 2016
23
24
25
26
27
28
2011122687_1
2
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT [SECOND REQUEST]
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?