TransFirst Group Inc et al v. Magliarditi et al

Filing 43

ORDER Granting 42 Motion to Extend Time to Answer/Respond re 11 Amended Complaint. Defendants Francine Magliarditi; FRM Trust; DJM Irrevocable Trust; Fane Trust; ATM Enterprises, LLC; DII Capital, Inc.; DFM Holdings, Ltd., DFM Holdings, LP; and DII Properties, LLC shall have two (2) weeks from March 18, 2017 to answer, move, or otherwise respond. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 3/6/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BAILUS COOK & KELESIS, LTD. GEORGE P. KELESIS, ESQ. (0069) MARK B. BAILUS, ESQ. (2284) MARC P. COOK, ESQ. (4574) JULIE L. SANPEI, ESQ. (5479) 517 S. Ninth Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Telephone: (702) 737-7702 Facsimile: (702) 737-7712 Email: law@bckltd.com Attorneys for Defendants, Francine Magliarditi, individually and as Trustee of the FRM Trust, DJM Irrevocable Trust, and FANE Trust, ATM Enterprises, LLC, DII Capital, Inc. DFM Holdings, Ltd., DFM Holdings, LP, and DII Properties LLC 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 **** 12 13 14 15 TRANSFIRST GROUP, INC. f/k/a TRANSFIRST HOLDINGS, INC., TRANSFIRST THIRD PARTY SALES LLC f/k/a TRANSFIRST MERCHANT SERVICES, INC., and PAYMENT RESOURCES INTERNATIONAL, LLC, 16 Plaintiff, 17 vs. 18 Case No.: 2:17-CV-00487-APG-VCF UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO ANSWER, MOVE OR OTHERWISE RESPOND (First Request) DOMINIC J. MAGLIARDITI; FRANCINE MAGLIARDITI; in her individually capacity, and as trustee of FRM TRUST, DJM IRREVOCABLE TRUST, and the FANE TRUST; ATM ENTERPRISES, LLC; DII CAPITAL, INC.; DFM HOLDINGS, LTD; DFM HOLDINGS, LP, DII PROPERTIES LLC; MAGLIARDITI, LTD.; CHAZZLIVE.COM, LLC; and SPARTAN PAYMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC. 19 20 21 22 23 Defendants. 24 25 COMES NOW, Defendants Francine Magliarditi; FRM Trust; DJM Irrevocable Trust; 26 Fane Trust; ATM Enterprises, LLC; DII Capital, Inc.; DFM Holdings, Ltd., DFM Holdings, LP; 27 and DII Properties, LLC (“Defendants”) file this Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time in 28 Which to Answer, Move or Otherwise Respond and, in support thereof, would show unto the Court as follows: 1 1. The above-entitled action was received by the Court from the Northern District of 2 Texas on February 15, 2017 pursuant to a court order (ECF No. 37). The Court has ordered 3 (ECF No. 39) that all non-resident counsel file a Verified Petition, Motion for Permission to 4 Practice in This Case Only by April 2, 2017. The Court has further ordered (ECF No. 39) that 5 counsel shall have until March 18, 2017 to file a Joint Status Report. 6 2. Defendants have recently retained the undersigned attorneys to act as their counsel 7 in this matter and their Notice of Appearance (ECF No. 41) was filed on March 2, 2017, and 8 counsel needs additional time to consider the relevant defenses and the appropriate course of 9 action in response to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. 10 3. Counsel for Plaintiffs has agreed that Defendants may have a two (2) week 11 extension from March 18, 2017, in which to answer, move or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ 12 Amended Complaint, and is not opposed to this motion. 13 14 4. This is the first request for an extension of time in which to answer, move or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. 15 5. The additional time requested herein is not sought for purposes of delay. 16 THEREFORE, Defendants request that the Court enter an Order granting their Motion 17 and that the Defendants have two (2) weeks from March 18, 2017 to answer, move or otherwise 18 respond to Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint. 19 DATED this 6th day of March, 2017. 20 BAILUS COOK & KELESIS, LTD. 21 /s/ Mark B. Bailus MARK B. BAILUS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 2284 517 S. Ninth Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Attorneys for Defendants 22 23 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28 3-6-2017 DATED: ______________________ 2

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?