Ponder v. Wild
Filing
13
ORDER Granting 12 Stipulation to Extend Deadline re 9 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Forum Non Conveniens. (Replies due by 3/24/2017.) Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 3/17/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
Case 2:16-cv-02305-JCM-PAL Document 12 Filed 03/15/17 Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
AARON R. MAURICE,ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 006412
BRITTANY WOOD,ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 007562
RYAN T. GORMLEY,ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 013494
KOLESAR & LEATHAM
400 South Rampart Boulevard, Suite 400
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
Telephone: (702) 362-7800
Facsimile: (702) 362-9472
E-Mail: amaurice@klnevada.com
bwood@klnevada.com
rgormley@klnevada.com
8
9
Attorneys for Defendant,
Dr. Hans-Peter Wild
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
*X*
MICHAEL H. PONDER,an individual,
CASE NO.: 2:16-cv-02305-JCM-PAL
Plaintiff,
vs.
DR. HANS-PETER WILD,an individual,
Defendant.
17
18
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR
DEFENDANT'S REPLY IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
DISMISS FOR LACK OF
PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND
FORUM NON CONVENIENS
FIRST REOUEST1
(
19
Pursuant to LR IA 6-1, 6-2, and LR 7-1, Defendant, Dr. Hans-Peter Wild, by and through
2
0
his attorneys, the law firm of Kolesar & Leatham, and Plaintiff Michael H. Ponder, by and
21
through his attorneys, the law firm of Holley Driggs Walch Fine Wray Puzey & Thompson,
22
stipulate to extend the deadline for Defendant's Reply in Support of the Motion to Dismiss for
23
Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Forum Non Conveniens ("Reply") to March 24, 2017.
24
Defendant filed the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Forum Non
25
Conveniens ("Motion") on February 21, 2017. See ECF No. 9. Plaintiff filed an opposition to
26
the Motion on March 10, 2017. See ECF No. 11. Defendant's Reply is currently due by March
27
17, 2017. Defendant and Plaintiff stipulate to extend the deadline for Defendant's Reply to
28
2342776 (9871-2)
Page 1 of 3
Case 2:16-cv-02305-JCM-PAL Document 12 Filed 03/15/17 Page 2 of 3
1
March 24, 2017 in order to alleviate the time constraints created by prior professional
2
commitments taking place the week of March 13, 2017, including an all-day mediation. This is
3
the first stipulation for extension oftime to file the Reply.
4
DATED this WiA day of March,2017.
DATED this
5
KOLESAR & LEATHAM
HOLLEY DRIGGS WALCH FINE WRAY PUZEY &
THOMPSON
By ;,
-~-t~c.
AARON R. MAURICE,ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 006412
BRITTANY WOOD,ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 007562
RYAN T. GORMLEY,ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 013494
400 South Rampart Boulevard, Suite 400
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
By
6
7
8
9
10
(•11
O
O
11
(.1
12
O
<
Li
notMarch,2017.
DONNA DI AG
Nevada Bar No. 009794
400 South Fourth Street, Third Floor
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Attorney for Plaintiff,
Michael H. Ponder
13
Attorneys for Defendant,
Dr. Hans-Peter Wild
C.4
14
0 .zo
23
E
N
•
O (2'
•
8
N
15
CE
16
ORDER
17
IT IS SO ORDERED:
18
March 17, 2017.
DATED this
day of
, 2017.
19
2
0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
21
22
23
2
4
25
26
27
28
2342776 (9871-2)
Page 2 of 3
Case 2:16-cv-02305-JCM-PAL Document 12 Filed 03/15/17 Page 3 of 3
1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2
Pursuant to FRCP 5, LR IC4-1, nd LR 5-1, I hereby certify that I am an employee of
3
Kolesar & Leatham, and that on thei
g day of March 2017, I caused to be served a true and
4
correct copy of the foregoing STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND THE
5
DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
6
FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION AND FORUM NON CONVENIENS
7 (
FIRST REQUEST)in Case No. 2:16-cv-02305-JCM-PAL in the following manner:
8
The Court's Electronic Filing System to all parties on the current service list:
9
Donna DiMaggio, Esq.
Holley Driggs Walch Fine Wray Puzey & Thompson
400 S. Fourth Street, Third Floor
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
10
11
Attorneyfor Plaintiff
12
An E
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
6
27
28
2342776 (9871-2)
Page 3 of 3
oyee of OLESAR & LEATHAM
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?