Filed: Aug. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 21, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT SOMOS INC'S MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(5) FILED. AUGUST 6, 2018. JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . Plaintiff Steven R. Davis, pro se, and Somos, Inc., through its undersigned counsel of record, agree that upon the Court's approval, Plaintiff's response to Defendant Somos Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, currently due on August 20, 2018, shall be due two weeks from that date, on September 4, 2018, for the reasons set forth
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT SOMOS INC'S MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(5) FILED. AUGUST 6, 2018. JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . Plaintiff Steven R. Davis, pro se, and Somos, Inc., through its undersigned counsel of record, agree that upon the Court's approval, Plaintiff's response to Defendant Somos Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, currently due on August 20, 2018, shall be due two weeks from that date, on September 4, 2018, for the reasons set forth ..
More
STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT SOMOS INC'S MOTION TO DISMISS UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(5) FILED. AUGUST 6, 2018.
JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.
Plaintiff Steven R. Davis, pro se, and Somos, Inc., through its undersigned counsel of record, agree that upon the Court's approval, Plaintiff's response to Defendant Somos Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, currently due on August 20, 2018, shall be due two weeks from that date, on September 4, 2018, for the reasons set forth below:
1. Defendant Somos, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss was filed on 8/6/18.
2. Plaintiff, via email exchange, requested an Extension to September 4, 2018, to file his response.
3. Plaintiff is pro se and has limited access to legal resources and needs the additional time to craft his response.
4. Attorney Irwin Schwartz communicated his assent and advised that Plaintiff contact local counsel, Attorney Joseph Ganley, to "work out details".1
5. Accordingly, Plaintiff and Defendant, Somos Inc. agree that, upon the Court's approval, Defendant's response to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss shall be due on or before September 4, 2018.
6. Furthermore, upon receipt of Plaintiff's response, the Defendant Somos Inc. shall have seven days to reply.
7. This Stipulation has been entered before the Motion is otherwise due.
8. Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1, this is Plaintiff and Defendant's first request for an extension of this deadline.
9. The parties seek this extension in good faith and not for purposes of delay.
10. No party would be prejudiced by the granting of this stipulated motion for an extension of time.
Dated, this the 18thday of August 2018, by the undersigned Plaintiff and counsel for Defendant, Somos Inc.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
