Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. REAL PROPERTY AND IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED AT 2366 SAN PABLO AVENUE, BERKELEY, CV 13-2027 JST. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20140516713 Visitors: 5
Filed: May 15, 2014
Latest Update: May 15, 2014
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION REQUEST PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2 FOR ORDER ENLARGING TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7-12 JON S. TIGAR, District Judge. JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, all parties to this matter, by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby do stipulate and request that the deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment ("MSJ") be extended to 14 days after the date
More

JOINT STIPULATION REQUEST PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 6-2 FOR ORDER ENLARGING TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7-12

JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.

JOINT STIPULATED REQUEST

Pursuant to Local Rule 6-2, all parties to this matter, by and through their respective attorneys of record, hereby do stipulate and request that the deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment ("MSJ") be extended to 14 days after the date on which the Court rules on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Claim on City of Berkeley for lack of standing filed on March 21, 2014 and continuation of the hearing on the MSJ until such time as the briefing is complete.

There will be no prejudice to Plaintiff because Plaintiff's reply will run from the new date pursuant to Local Rule 7-3.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

The parties shall contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk via e-mail once the opposition brief is filed to secure a new hearing date on the Motion for Summary Judgment.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, 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