Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

CHRISTENSEN v. CIGNA CORP., 4:14-cv-00849 JSW. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20140620779 Visitors: 15
Filed: May 28, 2014
Latest Update: May 28, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE AND MODIFY BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION AND DEFENDANTS' REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS; [PROPOSED] ORDER JEFFREY S. WHITE, District Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective attorneys that Plaintiff TROY CHRISTENSEN and Defendants LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA and THE GAP INC. DISABILITY PLAN may have additional time within which to prepare their respective oppositions a
More

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE AND MODIFY BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION AND DEFENDANTS' REPLY TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS; [PROPOSED] ORDER

JEFFREY S. WHITE, District Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective attorneys that Plaintiff TROY CHRISTENSEN and Defendants LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA and THE GAP INC. DISABILITY PLAN may have additional time within which to prepare their respective oppositions and reply to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies. Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss shall be due on or before June 20, 2014. Defendants' Reply In Support of their Motion to Dismiss shall be due on or before June 27, 2014. The hearing date was scheduled by this Court for June 20, 2014. The continuance of the deadlines will require a new hearing date of July 25, 2014.

Good cause exists to grant this modification as defense counsel's father is terminally ill and is in hospice with an estimated week to live which will make the June 6, 2014 date to file the reply very difficult.

This document is being electronically filed through the Court's ECF System. In this regard, counsel for Defendants hereby attests that (1) the content of this document is acceptable to all persons required to sign the document; (2) Plaintiff's counsel has concurred with the filing of this document; and (3) a record supporting this concurrence is available for inspection or production if so ordered.

SO STIPULATED.

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