Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Reyes v. Keefe Group, LLC, 3:18-cv-00004-LRH-WGC. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180208c98 Visitors: 14
Filed: Feb. 07, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 07, 2018
Summary: UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND ORDER [FIRST REQUEST] WILLIAM G. COBB , Magistrate Judge . Defendant Keefe Commissary Network, LLC (incorrectly identified in the Complaint as Keefe Group, LLC) ("Keefe"), by and through its counsel, Armstrong Teasdale LLP, hereby respectfully requests an extension of Keefe's deadline to respond to the Complaint from February 7, 2018, to March 5, 2018. Plaintiff Johana Reyes ("Reyes") has consented to the request
More

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND DEFENDANT'S DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT AND ORDER

[FIRST REQUEST]

Defendant Keefe Commissary Network, LLC (incorrectly identified in the Complaint as Keefe Group, LLC) ("Keefe"), by and through its counsel, Armstrong Teasdale LLP, hereby respectfully requests an extension of Keefe's deadline to respond to the Complaint from February 7, 2018, to March 5, 2018. Plaintiff Johana Reyes ("Reyes") has consented to the requested extension. This is the first request to extend this particular deadline.

On January 4, 2018, Reyes filed her Complaint against Keefe alleging claims for sexually hostile work environment, disability discrimination, and retaliation. See ECF No. 1. The Summons and Complaint were served on Keefe on January 17, 2018. See ECF No. 4. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 12(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Keefe's response to the Complaint is due on February 7, 2018.

On February 5, 2018, undersigned counsel contacted Reyes' counsel to discuss stipulating to extend Keefe's response deadline. Reyes' counsel agreed to continue Keefe's answer deadline from February 7, 2018, to March 5, 2018. Counsels, however, were not able to agree on language for a stipulation, therefore, Keefe files this unopposed motion.

Good cause for this extension exists. Counsel for Keefe was recently retained, and therefore, requires additional time to adequately review and consider this matter in anticipation of responding to the Complaint. This short extension will not prejudice any parties nor affect any current deadlines because this case is still in its infancy — no parties have answered the Complaint and a case management order had not been entered. This stipulation is entered into in good faith and is not intended to unduly delay the proceedings.

Accordingly, Keefe requests that an order be entered extending the deadline for Keefe to respond to the Complaint from February 7, 2018, to March 5, 2018. Dated this 7th day of February, 2018. ARMSTRONG TEASDALE, LLP

ORDER

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