Gupta v. Securities and Exchange Commission
Filing
24
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER: IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, CONSENTED TO AND AGREED by and between counsel for Plaintiff Rajat K. Gupta (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff,) and counsel for Defendant the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant" ) that the deadline to file Defendant's Answer be enlarged from July 25, 2011 to August 1,2011. This is the first time the parties have asked for an extension of the pleading deadlines. ( Securities and Exchange Commission answer due 8/1/2011 ) (Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff on 7/26/11) (laq)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
'.-----------------------------------x
RAJATK. GUPTA,
Plaintiff,
No. ll-CV-1900 (JSR)
v.
Stipulatiog and Order to
Extend Time to Answer
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Defendant.
---------··---·-----_·_-_·_----_·_--x
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, CONSENTED TO AND AGREED by and
between counsel for Plaintiff Rajat K. Gupta (hereinafter refetred to as "Plaintiff,) and counsel
for Defendant the United States Securities
.
and Exchange Commission (hereinafter referred to as
.
"Defendant'') that the deadline to file Defendant's Answer be enlarged from July 25, 2011 to
1QJ2Il7111l.1
August 1,2011. This is t'he'first time tbeparties have asked for an extension of the pleading
deadlines.
Dated: New York, New York
July 22. 2011
KRAMER LEVIN NAP!ALIS
& FRANKEL LLP
UNITED STATES SECURITIES &
?7E?O?
SSN
iN
~::2~
M::
.
BY:~
--~ru~·c~ruu~d~M7.~H~u?m'~~-c----
. Gary P. Naftilis
S. Obennan
Alan R. Friedman
David S. Frankel
Christopher Bruckmann
100 F. Street. N.B.
Washington, D.C. 20549
(202) 551-5140
Robin M. Wilcox
1171 Avenue ofthe Americas
New York. New York 10036
(212) 715-9100
Attorneys for Defendant
Attorneys for Plaintiff
IT IS sO ORDERED.
Dated: New York, New York
7
is(O(
I
,2011
I
H~~~
.~''''''
.,
I.
-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?