WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v. CHESTNUT BLUFFS AVENUE TRUST, 2:17-cv-01344-RFB-VCF. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20170818a24
Visitors: 18
Filed: Aug. 10, 2017
Latest Update: Aug. 10, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. AND FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION TO RESPOND TO COPPER RIDGE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION'S MOTION TO DISMISS (FIRST REQUEST) RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II , District Judge . Plaintiffs Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo") and Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae"), and Defendant Copper Ridge Community Association ("Copper Ridge" and together with Plaintiffs, the "Parties"), hereby stipulate and agree that Wells Farg
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. AND FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION TO RESPOND TO COPPER RIDGE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION'S MOTION TO DISMISS (FIRST REQUEST) RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II , District Judge . Plaintiffs Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo") and Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae"), and Defendant Copper Ridge Community Association ("Copper Ridge" and together with Plaintiffs, the "Parties"), hereby stipulate and agree that Wells Fargo..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. AND FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION TO RESPOND TO COPPER RIDGE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION'S MOTION TO DISMISS (FIRST REQUEST)
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo") and Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae"), and Defendant Copper Ridge Community Association ("Copper Ridge" and together with Plaintiffs, the "Parties"), hereby stipulate and agree that Wells Fargo's opposition to Copper Ridge's Motion to Dismiss (the "Motion") filed on August 4, 2017 (ECF No. 17), which is currently due August 18, 2017, may be extended to September 1, 2017. Any reply by Copper Ridge, which would have been due September 8, 2017, will be due September 15, 2017.
Wells Fargo and Fannie Mae are in the process of assessing the Motion and the arguments raised therein. The request is made in light of the litigation work load of the Parties, the number of litigation matters currently in process for the Parties, and in order to provide time for the Parties to brief the issues relevant to this litigation which are constantly changing due to the high number of similar cases. This is the first request for an extension of time in which to file a response to the Motion, and is not intended to cause any delay or prejudice to any party. Accordingly, good cause exists for the extension.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
