Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

PLOTZ v. DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, 14-00994 JST. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20140604b23 Visitors: 15
Filed: Jun. 03, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 03, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT JON S. TIGAR, District Judge. Plaintiff, John Plotz, and Defendant, the Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA"), hereby stipulate as follows: WHEREAS Plaintiff and Defendant have conferred about this case arising under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended, and believe that it may be possible for the parties to resolve this matter amicably without the need for f
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.

Plaintiff, John Plotz, and Defendant, the Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA"), hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS Plaintiff and Defendant have conferred about this case arising under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, as amended, and believe that it may be possible for the parties to resolve this matter amicably without the need for further litigation.

WHEREAS the parties require additional time to confirm the terms of their agreement and prepare a stipulation of dismissal, and believe that it would best conserve their resources to extend the current deadline of June 3, 2014, for DEA to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint in light of the potential settlement of this case.

WHEREAS the parties have sought one prior time modification request. ECF No. 11.

WHEREAS other than the deadline for DEA to file its response to the Complaint, the parties do not seek to extend any of the other deadlines in the Court's April 8, 2014, Order (ECF No. 15).

ACCORDINGLY, the parties hereby agree and stipulate to a continuance of the deadline for DEA to file its response to the Complaint from June 3, 2014, to June 13, 2014, and request that the Court order the same.

SO STIPULATED.

* I, Michelle Lo, attest that I have obtained concurrence in the filing of this document from Plaintiff John Plotz.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

The following revised deadlines apply to this case:

June 13, 2014: DEA's response to the Complaint due June 13, 2014: ADR stipulation due July 9, 2014: Case Management Statement due July 23, 2014: Case Management Conference
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