Bueing v. U.S. Bank National Association ND et al

Filing 30

ORDER re Defendants' 21 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer. The Court STAYS all deadlines in this matter. The Court notes that Defendants filed their Answer on February 28, 2018, and therefore Defendants' motion is rendered M OOT. The Court ORDERS the parties to file a joint status report no later than sixty (60) days from the date of this Order updating the Court on the estate counsel's progress and whether the matter is ready to proceed. Signed by Judge Richard A Jones. (TH)

1

HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10

ANGELA BUEING,

11

Plaintiff,

12

14

ORDER

v.

13

CASE NO. C18-54 RAJ

U.S. BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION ND, et al.,

15
Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion to extend time to
respond to complaint. Dkt. # 21. Plaintiff opposes the extension but offers no
substantive argument as to why this motion should be denied. Dkt. # 23. Indeed,
courtesy and professionalism often assume agreements on such simple extensions. Based
upon the briefing before it, the Court finds that an irresponsible breakdown in civility has
occurred between the parties. The Court warns the parties that it has low tolerance for
inefficient or juvenile disputes among esteemed attorneys of the bench, and the Court
encourages the parties to work with each other in a collegial manner as this matter
progresses.

27

ORDER- 1

1

The parties agree that a stay in this matter is appropriate. Dkt. ## 24, 26. The

2 Court agrees. The Court STAYS all deadlines in this matter. The Court notes that
3 Defendants filed their Answer on February 28, 2018, and therefore Defendants’ motion is
4 rendered MOOT. The Court ORDERS the parties to file a joint status report no later
5 than sixty (60) days from the date of this Order updating the Court on the estate counsel’s
6 progress and whether the matter is ready to proceed.
7

This Order does not terminate Plaintiff’s estate’s responsibility to continue to

8 make the court-ordered periodic payments. Those shall continue pursuant to RCW 61.24.
9 The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s counsel’s request for guidance regarding notice to
10 the Court of compliance with the payment plan. The Court finds periodic notice
11 unnecessary; the Court limits its requirement for notice to only such time payments are
12 made untimely or to such time payments cease.
13

Dated this 1st day of March, 2018.

14

A

15
16

The Honorable Richard A. Jones
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

ORDER- 2