Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

BALDIZON v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, 2:17-cv-00228-WBS-AC. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170227903 Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 23, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 23, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND FOR DEFENDANT RACKLEY WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . Plaintiffs Janette Baldizon and Ana Baldizon, and Defendant R. Rackley, through their respective counsel, stipulate as follows: 1. Rackley was served with the Summons and Complaint in this matter on February 3, 2017; 2. Counsel have met and conferred concerning the allegations in the Complaint in anticipation of filing a Motion to Dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Pro
More

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND FOR DEFENDANT RACKLEY

Plaintiffs Janette Baldizon and Ana Baldizon, and Defendant R. Rackley, through their respective counsel, stipulate as follows:

1. Rackley was served with the Summons and Complaint in this matter on February 3, 2017;

2. Counsel have met and conferred concerning the allegations in the Complaint in anticipation of filing a Motion to Dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6);

3. Plaintiffs anticipate filing an Amended Complaint by March 15, 2017; and

4. Under Local Rule 144(a), the time for Rackley to respond to the Complaint is extended to March 24, 2017.

ORDER

In light of the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time for Defendant R. Rackley to respond to the Complaint is extended to March 24, 2017.

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