Filed: Oct. 18, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 18, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs Noel C. Murray and Dr. Swarna Perera ("Plaintiffs"), by and through their counsel of record, the Law Office of Hayes & Welsh, the Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C., and Law Offices of Joshua B. Kons, LLC, and Defendants Provident Trust Group, LLC, and Ascensus, LLC, by and through their counsel of record, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, stipulate and request that the Court extend the time by which Plaintiffs
Summary: STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER MIRANDA M. DU , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiffs Noel C. Murray and Dr. Swarna Perera ("Plaintiffs"), by and through their counsel of record, the Law Office of Hayes & Welsh, the Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C., and Law Offices of Joshua B. Kons, LLC, and Defendants Provident Trust Group, LLC, and Ascensus, LLC, by and through their counsel of record, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, stipulate and request that the Court extend the time by which Plaintiffs m..
More
STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER
MIRANDA M. DU, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiffs Noel C. Murray and Dr. Swarna Perera ("Plaintiffs"), by and through their counsel of record, the Law Office of Hayes & Welsh, the Law Office of Christopher J. Gray, P.C., and Law Offices of Joshua B. Kons, LLC, and Defendants Provident Trust Group, LLC, and Ascensus, LLC, by and through their counsel of record, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, stipulate and request that the Court extend the time by which Plaintiffs must file and serve papers in response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21) until and including, November 12, 2018 and extend the time by which Defendant may file and serve any reply papers in connection with the Motion to Dismiss until and including December 3, 2018. This Stipulation is made and based upon the following:
1. Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on July 26, 2018, in which they allege Defendants breached their contractual and fiduciary duties as trustees and custodians of Plaintiffs' Individual Retirement Accounts. ECF No. 1. Plaintiffs seek certification to represent a class of similarly situated individuals across the country. Id.
2. Defendants were served with the Complaint on August 2, 2018. ECF No. 7.
3. Defendants filed and served their Motion to Dismiss on October 8, 2018. Plaintiffs' counsel were largely engaged on other matters last week including out-of-town meetings and believe that the contemplated extension of time provides an appropriate period in which to fully address the factual and legal issues raised in the Motion to Dismiss. Defendants wish to reserve 14 days thereafter to file reply papers so that they may have a full and fair opportunity to address the factual and legal arguments to be raised in Plaintiffs' opposition papers.
4. This is the first request for an extension of time on these deadlines. The parties previously stipulated to (and the Court so ordered) an extension of time for Defendants to respond to the Complaint. See ECF No. 8. This Stipulation is entered into in good faith and not for purposes of delay.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
