Young v. Northwest Computer Accessories, Inc.

Filing 10

ORDER granting 9 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. So Ordered. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 1/11/22) (yv)

Download PDF
Case 1:21-cv-09071-AJN-RWL Document 10 Filed 01/11/22 Page 1 of 2 New Jersey New York Florida Joel G. MacMull, Partner 973.295.3652 Direct 1/11/2022 3 Becker Farm Road Roseland, New Jersey 07068 973.736.4600 Main 973.325.7467 Fax 570 Lexington Avenue, 21st Floor New York, New York 10022 212.776.1834 Main January 6, 2022 VIA ECF Hon. Alison J. Nathan, U.S.D.J. Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 Re: Young v. Northwest Computer Accessories, Inc. Case No. 21-cv-09071-(AJN)-RWL Dear Judge Nathan, We represent defendant Northwest Computer Accessories, Inc. (“Defendant”) in connection with the above-captioned matter. We write to the Court now, with the consent of plaintiff, to request 30 days to respond or otherwise move against the Complaint. (ECF 1.) Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1), Defendant submits good cause exists for the requested extension of time. This office was only retained on Tuesday of this week in connection with this matter and, based on a discussion with plaintiff’s counsel this morning, the parties are optimistic that they will be able to resolve this matter amicably in the coming days. While plaintiff has filed an affidavit of service which purports to have effectuated service of the Complaint on November 19, 2021 (ECF 6), “Aaron ‘Doe’” was not authorized to accept service on behalf of the Defendant. (Id.) Nevertheless, while this office is aware of the standard set forth in Enron Oil Corp. v. Diakuhara, 10 F.3d 90, 96 (2d Cir. 1993) concerning why a default should not be entered, plaintiff has not filed a motion for a default pursuant to § 3(K) of Your Honor’s Individual 4875-8041-9592, v. 1 Case 1:21-cv-09071-AJN-RWL Document 10 Filed 01/11/22 Page 2 of 2 Practices, has indicated that he does not intend to do so, and is agreeable to the 30 day extension of time being requested. Accordingly, we respectfully submit the requirements set forth in Enron Oil Corp. are not applicable here. In further compliance with § 1(E) of Your Honor’s Practices, Defendant further states as follows: 1.) The original due date for Defendant to respond to the Complaint (assuming arguendo the validity of service) was December 10, 2021; 2.) No prior request for an extension of time to respond to the Complaint has been made; 3.) Defendant respectfully requests an additional thirty (30) days – until February 7, 2022 – to file its Answer or otherwise move. The Court’s continued attention to this matter is appreciated. Respectfully submitted, Joel G. MacMull cc: All Counsel of Record (via ECF only) 1/11/2022 4875-8041-9592, v. 1

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?