Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Rygg v. Life Insurance Company of North America, 3:17-cv-06891-JST. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20181114c60 Visitors: 4
Filed: Nov. 13, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 13, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . TO THIS HONORABLE COURT: WHEREAS the following briefing schedule was set by the Court on November 5, 2018, and Plaintiff's Opening Brief: October 24, 2018 Defendant's Opening Brief: November 16, 2018 Plaintiff's Responsive Brief: December 10, 2018 Defendant's Responsive Brief:
More

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

TO THIS HONORABLE COURT:

WHEREAS the following briefing schedule was set by the Court on November 5, 2018, and

Plaintiff's Opening Brief: October 24, 2018 Defendant's Opening Brief: November 16, 2018 Plaintiff's Responsive Brief: December 10, 2018 Defendant's Responsive Brief: January 7, 2019 Hearing: February 7, 2019 @ 2:00 p.m.

WHEREAS, counsel for Defendant charged with preparing the Opening Brief lost the family home due to the fires, and has been and will be unable to complete the review of Plaintiff's Opening Brief and complete Defendants' Opening Brief before November 30th; and

WHEREAS, counsel for both parties have met and conferred, and agreed upon a revised schedule, which maintain the current hearing date and takes in to account the calendar of both counsel and the upcoming holidays:

Plaintiff's Opening Brief: October 24, 2018 Defendant's Opening Brief: November 30, 2018 Plaintiff's Responsive Brief: December 17, 2018 Defendant's Responsive Brief: January 10, 2019 Hearing: February 7, 2019 @ 2:00 p.m.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff and Defendant, by and through their respective attorneys of record, that with the Court's permission the following brief and hearing schedule be adopted as set forth above.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

SIGNATURE ATTESTATION

I, Kristin P. Kyle de Bautista, hereby attest that concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from the other signatory on this document.

[PROPOSED ORDER]

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, it is so ordered. The briefing and hearing schedule set forth above is hereby adopted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer