Clement v. Colvin et al
Filing
41
ORDER granting 40 Stipulation; Re: 33 Motion to Dismiss. Responses due by 10/4/2018. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/12/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)
Case 2:17-cv-02787-JCM-PAL Document 40 Filed 09/12/18 Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
THOMAS J. GIBSON, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 3995
GIBSON LAW GROUP, PLLC
2340 East Calvada Blvd., # 5
Pahrump, Nevada 89048
Telephone: 775-209-1035
Facsimile: 775-624-9778
tgibson@gibsonlawgroup.net
Attorney for Plaintiff
The undersigned does hereby affirm that this
document does not contain the social security
number of any person.
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
GIBSON LAW GROUP, PLLC.
2340 E. Calvada Blvd.,Suite 5
Pahrump, NV 89048
(775)209-1035
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
MARK CLEMENT,
Case No: 2:17-cv-02787-JCM-PAL
Plaintiff,
vs.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, in her
representative capacity of the Social Security
Administration, COMERICA BANK, a
financial services company, and XEROX, a
corporation,
17
STIPULATION TO ENLARGE TIME TO
RESPOND TO FEDERAL DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS (Third Stipulation)
Defendants.
18
19
Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 26-4, the parties, by and through their respective counsel of
20
record, with good cause appearing, hereby stipulate and request that the Court enlarge Plaintiff’s
21
time to respond to Federal Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss filed with this Court on August 06,
22
2018 [ECF #33].
23
24
25
Whereby the original response date was due on or before August 20, 2018, the parties
26
and their counsel stipulated to enlarge the deadline [ECF #33], which was granted by the
27
Honorable Judge James C. Mahan on August 20, 2018 [ECF #36] extending the deadline to
28
respond to Thursday, August 30, 2018. The parties stipulated to a second extension of time to
Page 1 of 3
Case 2:17-cv-02787-JCM-PAL Document 40 Filed 09/12/18 Page 2 of 3
1
respond to U.S. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss by September 13, 2018, of which the Court
2
granted [ECF #39]. The Parties hereby stipulate to a third extension of time to respond to the
3
Motion to Dismiss [ECF #33] in order to facilitate the possibility of a resolution without the
4
necessity of litigation. Therefore, the Parties request the new deadline to respond to said motion
5
6
be enlarged to October 4th, 2018.
DATED this 12th day September, 2018.
DATED this 12th day September, 2018.
GIBSON LAW GROUP, PLLC
DAYLE ELIESON
United States Attorney
/s/Thomas J. Gibson.
THOMAS J. GIBSON, ESQ.
2340 East Calvada Boulevard, #5
Pahrump, NV 89048
Attorney for Plaintiff
/s/Mark E. Woolf
MARK E. WOOLF
Assistant United States Attorney
501 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 1100
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Attorneys for Federal Defendant
7
8
9
GIBSON LAW GROUP, PLLC.
2340 E. Calvada Blvd.,Suite 5
Pahrump, NV 89048
(775)209-1035
10
11
12
13
14
ORDER
15
16
17
IT IS SO ORDERED that Plaintiff’s deadline to respond to Federal Defendant’s Motion
to Dismiss is now October 4th, 2018.
18
_____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
September 12, 2018
DATED: ____________________________
19
20
21
22
Respectfully submitted by:
GIBSON LAW GROUP, PLLC
23
24
25
26
27
28
/s/Thomas J. Gibson ____
THOMAS J. GIBSON, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 3995
2340 East Calvada Blvd., # 5
Pahrump, Nevada 89048
Telephone: 775-209-1035
Facsimile: 775-624-9778
Attorney for Plaintiff
Page 2 of 3
Case 2:17-cv-02787-JCM-PAL Document 40 Filed 09/12/18 Page 3 of 3
1
2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
3
I DO HEREBY CERTIFY that service of the foregoing STIPULATION TO ENLARGE
4
TIME TO RESPOND TO FEDERAL DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Third
5
Stipulation) was made on all parties via the Court’s Electronic Case Filing System.
6
7
8
Dated this 12th day of September, 2018
9
GIBSON LAW GROUP, PLLC.
2340 E. Calvada Blvd.,Suite 5
Pahrump, NV 89048
(775)209-1035
10
11
___/s/Sunny Dean
An agent of GIBSON LAW GROUP, PLLC
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 3 of 3
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?