Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Ybarra v. Capital One Bank USA, N.A., 2:18-cv-01578-KJD-VCF. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20181026e17 Visitors: 14
Filed: Oct. 25, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 25, 2018
Summary: Assigned to Judge Kent J. Dawson; Referred to Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (SECOND REQUEST) [ [Proposed] Order lodged concurrently herewith] CAM FERENBACH , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff Yvonne Ybarra ("Plaintiff"), by and through her counsel of record, and Defendant Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. ("Capital One"), by and through its counsel of record (collectively, the "Parties"), hereby submit this second stipulation to extend Capital
More

Assigned to Judge Kent J. Dawson; Referred to Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

(SECOND REQUEST)

[[Proposed] Order lodged concurrently herewith]

Plaintiff Yvonne Ybarra ("Plaintiff"), by and through her counsel of record, and Defendant Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. ("Capital One"), by and through its counsel of record (collectively, the "Parties"), hereby submit this second stipulation to extend Capital One's time to file a responsive pleading to Plaintiff's Complaint by an additional twenty-one (21) days, as follows:

WHEREAS:

1. Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this matter on August 21, 2018;

2. Plaintiff has filed a proof of service indicating that Capital One was personally served on September 10, 2018;

3. Although Capital One does not concede that service was proper, it did not contest service, but rather stipulated with Plaintiff for a brief extension of time for Capital One to file its responsive pleading to the Complaint, such that the responsive pleading would be due by October 24, 2018, to which the Court agreed;

4. The Parties are currently discussing (a) whether this matter can be resolved without need for additional litigation and (b), if not, whether the Parties can agree to avoid a motion to dismiss by either a first amended complaint or stipulating to dismiss a cause of action;

5. In light of the foregoing, a second extension for Capital One to file a responsive pleading would benefit both Parties, because it will allow them to continue to gather additional facts and information while continuing to devote their resources to exploring the potential for early resolution of this matter before incurring further fees and costs;

6. The Parties agree the request is made in good faith and not for the purposes of delay;

7. Capital One and Plaintiff have agreed to extend Capital One's deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint by an addition twenty-one (21) days from October 24, 2018 to November 14, 2018.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED THAT:

Capital One will file its responsive pleading to Plaintiff's Complaint on or before November 14, 2018.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

Having considered the foregoing stipulation of the parties and finding good cause to extend the deadline for Capital One to respond to the operative Complaint by an additional 21 days, the Court hereby orders as follows:

The deadline for Capital One to respond to the Complaint is extended from October 24, 2018 to November 14, 2018.

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