ORDER

THOMAS B. SMITH, Magistrate Judge.

This is an action for injunctive relief pursuant to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189. (Doc. 1, ¶ 1). Plaintiff suffers from what constitutes a "qualified disability" under the ADA. (Id., ¶ 3). He alleges that at all material times, Defendant has owned and operated the real property located at 6103-6131 Anno Avenue and 6105-6169 Cyril Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32809 (the "Property"). (Id., ¶ 7, 9). The Property is a place of public accommodation. (Id., ¶ 13). Plaintiff complains, inter alia, that the Property lacks handicapped parking and that despite demand, Defendant has failed and refused to designate handicapped parking to meet Plaintiff's needs. (Id., ¶ 16).

Pending before the Court is the parties' Joint Motion for Stay and an Extension of Time to Respond to the Complaint (Doc. 8). The parties seek a stay of this action until November 29, 2014.1 (Doc. 8 at 1). If granted, the stay will stay all of the parties' pretrial obligations (including the time for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's complaint), until November 29, 2014. (Id.). As grounds, the parties say Defendant believes it has been named in error because it does not own the Property. (Id., at 2). If the stay is granted, then Defendant will obtain a title search to establish the owner of the Property. (Id.). Then Plaintiff can decide whether to voluntarily dismiss this action against Defendant and amend his complaint to name the true Property owner. (Id.). The parties submit that this procedure is economical because it will prevent Defendant from incurring unnecessary attorney's fees.

The motion causes the Court to wonder whether Plaintiff researched the public records, or obtained a title report on the Property before filing suit and if not, why not? The Court also wonders why such a lengthy amount of time is required to order, receive, and read a title report?

Upon due consideration, the Court GRANTS the motion in part. This case is STAYED through November 12, 2014. This gives the parties three weeks on top of the time they have already had to complete this exercise. If this is not a sufficient amount of time, then the parties can file a new motion, and show good cause why additional time is required. In all other respects, the motion is DENIED.