Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

CHAMARIA v. DIAB, 2:17-CV-02023-JAD-CWH. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170925e04 Visitors: 11
Filed: Sep. 21, 2017
Latest Update: Sep. 21, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER ECF No. 46 JENNIFER DORSEY , District Judge . STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION (DKT. 10) (Third Request) Plaintiffs VISHAL CHAMARIA, VIVEK CHAMARIA, PUJA CHARMARIA, GAURI CHAMARIA, P & V, LLC, and CHIP SHOP, LLC (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"), by and through their attorney of record ALEXIS L. BROWN, ESQ. of the law office of ALEXIS BROWN LAW, CHTD., and Defendant TONY M. DIAB, Defen
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER

ECF No. 46

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PERSONAL JURISDICTION (DKT. 10) (Third Request)

Plaintiffs VISHAL CHAMARIA, VIVEK CHAMARIA, PUJA CHARMARIA, GAURI CHAMARIA, P & V, LLC, and CHIP SHOP, LLC (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"), by and through their attorney of record ALEXIS L. BROWN, ESQ. of the law office of ALEXIS BROWN LAW, CHTD., and Defendant TONY M. DIAB, Defendant in Proper Person, hereby enter into this Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Dkt. 10) (Third Request) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 and L.R. IA 6-1 as follows:

WHEREAS on July 31, 2017, Mr. Diab filed Defendant Tony M. Diab's Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction; Memorandum of Points and Authorities Thereon (the "Diab Motion to Dismiss") (Dkt. 10).

WHEREAS pursuant to Court orders, Plaintiffs' response to the Diab Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 10) was due and filed September 8, 2017. (Dkt. 28, 32, 38, 40.)

WHEREAS the Parties previously agreed to extend the time for Mr. Diab to file his Reply in Support of the Diab Motion to Dismiss from September 15, 2017 to September 18, 2017, and then to September 21, 2017. (Dkt. 28, 32, 40, 44, 45.)

WHEREAS the Parties have resumed settlement discussions and believe that an amicable resolution to their dispute is possible.

WHEREAS in light of the foregoing, the Parties stipulate and agree that Mr. Diab shall have this second extension until and including September 22, 2017 to file his Reply in Support of the Diab Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 10).

Based on the foregoing,

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED that good cause exists to allow Mr. Diab until September 22, 2017 to file a reply in support of the Diab Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 10). 2017.

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