Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. AMG SERVICES, INC., 2:12-cv-00536-GMN-VCF. (2012)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20120417b77 Visitors: 4
Filed: Apr. 16, 2012
Latest Update: Apr. 16, 2012
Summary: ORDER CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge. Before the court is defendants Kim C. Tucker and Park 269, LLC's Joinder To Agreed Motion for Extension of Time For Defendants To Respond To The Motion For Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief (#12). (#19). On April 11, 2012, several defendants filed an unopposed motion to extend time to respond to the plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction. (#12). Defendant Robert D. Campbell filed a joinder to the motion on April 12, 2012. (#14). D
More

ORDER

CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.

Before the court is defendants Kim C. Tucker and Park 269, LLC's Joinder To Agreed Motion for Extension of Time For Defendants To Respond To The Motion For Preliminary Injunction and Other Equitable Relief (#12). (#19).

On April 11, 2012, several defendants filed an unopposed motion to extend time to respond to the plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction. (#12). Defendant Robert D. Campbell filed a joinder to the motion on April 12, 2012. (#14). Defendant Partner Weekly, LLC filed a motion for extension on April 13, 2012. (#16). Defendants The Muir Law Firm, LLC and Timothy J. Muir filed a joinder to defendants motion (#12) on April 13, 2012. (#17).

On April 13, 2012, the court issued an order granting defendants' motions to extend time to respond to plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction (#12 and #16), and extending the response deadline to May 4, 2012. (#18). The court held that good cause existed to grant the extension, because (1) plaintiff agreed to the extension, (2) counsel for defendants needed time to review the complex and lengthy filings in this action, (3) the parties are interested in meeting in advance to explore alternatives to litigation, and (4) the extension would provide certain defense counsel the ability to evaluate the appropriate way to resolve the issue of whether defendant is a properly named defendant. Id. The court stated that since defendants "Don E. Brady, Troy L. LittleAxe, Park 269 LLC, and Kim C. Tucker have not joined moving defendants motion (#12) or filed a separate motion for extension," the extension granted does not apply to those defendants. Id.

On April 16, 2012, defendants Kim C. Tucker and Park 269, LLC filed the present joinder to defendants' motion (#12) to extend time to respond to plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction. (#19). Defendants Tucker and Park 269 ask this court to grant them an extension of time, up to and including, May 4, 2012, in which to file their response to the motion for preliminary injunction. Id. Based on the court's findings in its April 13, 2012, order (#18), good cause exists to grant defendants Tucker and Park 269's request for extension. Defendants Don E. Brady and Troy L. LittleAxe have not filed a joinder or a separate motion for extension of time.

Accordingly, and for good cause shown,

IT IS ORDERED that defendants Kim C. Tucker and Park 269, LLC's Response to Plaintiff's Motion For Preliminary Injunction and Other Relief (#4) is due on or before May 4, 2012. The extension of time does not apply to defendants Don E. Brady and Troy L. LittleAxe.

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