Martinez v. County of Sonoma, 3:15-cv-01953-JST. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20160218a00
Visitors: 14
Filed: Feb. 17, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 17, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE ASSOCIATED DEADLINES ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO STRIKE; [PROPOSED] ORDER JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . WHEREAS, plaintiffs have filed an amended notice on plaintiffs' motion to strike affirmative defenses from defendants' joint answer which is currently scheduled for a hearing based upon the before the Court on March 31, 2016. See ECF No. 62. WHEREAS, defendants' counsel Bonnie Freeman is currently on vacation and is unavailable to meet the associated deadli
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE ASSOCIATED DEADLINES ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO STRIKE; [PROPOSED] ORDER JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . WHEREAS, plaintiffs have filed an amended notice on plaintiffs' motion to strike affirmative defenses from defendants' joint answer which is currently scheduled for a hearing based upon the before the Court on March 31, 2016. See ECF No. 62. WHEREAS, defendants' counsel Bonnie Freeman is currently on vacation and is unavailable to meet the associated deadlin..
More
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE ASSOCIATED DEADLINES ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO STRIKE; [PROPOSED] ORDER
JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.
WHEREAS, plaintiffs have filed an amended notice on plaintiffs' motion to strike affirmative defenses from defendants' joint answer which is currently scheduled for a hearing based upon the before the Court on March 31, 2016. See ECF No. 62.
WHEREAS, defendants' counsel Bonnie Freeman is currently on vacation and is unavailable to meet the associated deadline to respond to said motion on February 23, 2016;
WHEREAS, the parties, through their representatives, have agreed to stipulate to continue the opposition and reply dates for said motion from the new hearing date based upon Ms. Freeman's unavailability the parties hereby STIPULATE to the following:
1. the Court's rescheduling of the associated deadline for defendants to respond to said motion to be continued to March 8, 2016; and
2. the Court's rescheduling of the associated deadline for plaintiffs to reply to said motion to be continued to March 15, 2016.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Pursuant to the parties' stipulation and finding good cause, the Court hereby ORDERS the following:
1. the associated deadline for defendants to respond to said motion is continued to March 8, 2016; and
2. the associated deadline for plaintiffs to reply to said motion is continued to March 15, 2016.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
