Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

GARIBALDI v. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, 3:13-CV-02223-SI. (2013)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20131017a52 Visitors: 22
Filed: Oct. 15, 2013
Latest Update: Oct. 15, 2013
Summary: SECOND STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge. WHEREAS, Plaintiff Sheri Garibaldi ("Plaintiff') filed the above-captioned Complaint in the San Mateo County Superior Court on April 12, 2013; WHEREAS, Defendant Bank of America Corporation ("BAC") removed this case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on May 15, 2013; WHEREAS, BAC's last day to
More

SECOND STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge.

WHEREAS, Plaintiff Sheri Garibaldi ("Plaintiff') filed the above-captioned Complaint in the San Mateo County Superior Court on April 12, 2013;

WHEREAS, Defendant Bank of America Corporation ("BAC") removed this case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on May 15, 2013;

WHEREAS, BAC's last day to file a responsive pleading to the Complaint was May 22, 2013;

WHEREAS, on May 22, 2013, the parties stipulated to extend BAC's time within which to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint by two days, up to and including May 24, 2013 (Dkt. 6);

WHEREAS, on May 24, 2013, the parties stipulated to extend BAC's time within which to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint by twelve days, up to and including June 5, 2013 (Dkt. 9);

WHEREAS, on June 5, 2013, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (Dkt. 15), which, among other things, substituted Bank of America, N.A. ("BANA") for Bank of America Corporation;

WHEREAS, the Parties agreed to multiple stipulations of BANA's time to respond to FAC in connection with the Parties' efforts to mediate the case;

WHEREAS, the Parties agreed that Plaintiff could file a Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") and that BANA would have 21 days from the date of filing of the SAC to file its response, so that BANA's deadline to respond to the SAC would be after the mediation in this matter, which is scheduled for October 9, 2013;

WHEREAS, on September 24, 2013, Plaintiff filed her SAC (Dkt. 25);

WHEREAS, on October 8, 2013, the Parties stipulated to Provide BANA until October 15, 2013 to respond to the SAC (Dkt. 27);

WHEREAS, on October 9, 2013, the Parties took part in a private mediation, which resulted in a mediator's proposal that may resolve portions of the lawsuit, and which is still pending;

WHEREAS, to facilitate the process of exploring a potential settlement, the Parties agree to extend BANA's deadline to respond to the SAC by an additional 7 days, up to and including October 22, 2013;

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between Plaintiff and BANA through their respective undersigned counsel that BANA will have an extension, up to and through October 22, 2013, to serve and file its response to the Second Amended Complaint.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Court, having read and considered the Parties' SECOND STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANT TO RESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT, and finding good cause in support thereof, the Court hereby orders that Defendant shall have until October 22, 2013 to file and serve its response to the Second Amended Complaint.

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