Global Aerospace (North America), Inc. v. Skyview Aviation LLC, 2:17-CV-00147-JAM-KJN. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20170612752
Visitors: 8
Filed: Jun. 08, 2017
Latest Update: Jun. 08, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (LOCAL RULE 144); ORDER ON STIPULATION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . RECITALS 1. Plaintiffs Global Aerospace (North America), Inc., a Delaware Corporation and Cirrus Design Corporation dba Cirrus Aircraft, a Minnesota Corporation are represented by attorneys Shalem A. Massey and Dylan S. Kornbluth of BRYAN CAVE LLP. 2. Defendant Skyview Aviation LLC is represented by attorneys Robert E. Davies, Stephen J. M
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (LOCAL RULE 144); ORDER ON STIPULATION JURY TRIAL DEMANDED JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . RECITALS 1. Plaintiffs Global Aerospace (North America), Inc., a Delaware Corporation and Cirrus Design Corporation dba Cirrus Aircraft, a Minnesota Corporation are represented by attorneys Shalem A. Massey and Dylan S. Kornbluth of BRYAN CAVE LLP. 2. Defendant Skyview Aviation LLC is represented by attorneys Robert E. Davies, Stephen J. Ma..
More
STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (LOCAL RULE 144); ORDER ON STIPULATION
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
RECITALS
1. Plaintiffs Global Aerospace (North America), Inc., a Delaware Corporation and Cirrus Design Corporation dba Cirrus Aircraft, a Minnesota Corporation are represented by attorneys Shalem A. Massey and Dylan S. Kornbluth of BRYAN CAVE LLP.
2. Defendant Skyview Aviation LLC is represented by attorneys Robert E. Davies, Stephen J. Mackey, Mary A. Stewart and Gregory A. Nelson of DONAHUE DAVIES LLP.
3. On or about January 23, 2017, Plaintiffs electronically filed their Complaint in the above-entitled matter.
4. On or about April 22, 2017, service of process was affected upon Defendant Skyview Aviation LLC.
5. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 15, Defendant Skyview Aviation LLC's responsive pleading to the Complaint was initially due to be filed and served on or before May 12, 2017.
6. On May 5, 2017, counsel for Plaintiffs and Defendant Skyview Aviation stipulated to extend Defendant Skyview Aviation's time to respond to the Complaint to and including June 9, 2017, an additional twenty-eight (28) days from the original May 12, 2017 response date, as provided for in Local Rule 144.
7. The parties have been actively pursuing settlement discussions in this case and would like additional time to continue these discussions, prior to Defendant Skyview Aviation having to file its responsive pleading.
8. Subject to the Court's approval, the parties hereto stipulate and agree that Defendant Skyview Aviation's time to file and serve its responsive pleading shall be extended an additional thirty (30) days from the current June 9, 2017 response date, and that Defendant's responsive pleading will be due to be filed and served on or before July 10, 2017.
9. The parties agree that this additional extension of time will best serve the parties' interests by allowing them additional time to pursue settlement negotiations.
10. Pursuant to Local Rule 144, the parties request that the Court issue the proposed order on this stipulation of the parties, in order to allow the parties time to continue their on-going settlement discussions.
STIPULATION
The parties do now hereby agree and stipulate as follows:
1. The time for Defendant Skyview Aviation LLC to file and serve its responsive pleading to the Complaint is extended to and including July 10, 2017, an additional thirty (30) days from the current June 9, 2017 response date.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
ORDER ON STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
Pursuant to the foregoing Stipulation of the parties for extension of time for Defendant Skyview Aviation to respond to Complaint, and as provided for in Local Rule 144, it is hereby ordered that:
The time for Defendant Skyview Aviation LLC to file and serve its responsive pleading to the Complaint is extended to and including July 10, 2017, an additional thirty (30) days from the current June 9, 2017 response date.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
