Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Federal Trade Commission v. Interbill, Ltd., 2:06-CV-1644-JCM-PAL. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20181218d12 Visitors: 3
Filed: Dec. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 17, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND HEARING DATE FOR EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER BY DEFENDANT THOMAS WELLS, MOVANT PRIORITY PAYOUT CORP. (Second Request) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"), Defendant Thomas Wells, and Movant Priority Payout Corp. (collectively "the Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, that the date for the hearing on the Emergency Motion for Protective Order
More

STIPULATION TO EXTEND HEARING DATE FOR EMERGENCY MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER BY DEFENDANT THOMAS WELLS, MOVANT PRIORITY PAYOUT CORP.

(Second Request)

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"), Defendant Thomas Wells, and Movant Priority Payout Corp. (collectively "the Parties"), by and through their respective counsel of record, that the date for the hearing on the Emergency Motion for Protective Order [ECF No. 62], currently set for January 8, 2019, should be continued for a period of at least 45 days.

The Parties have reached agreement on a proposed final settlement, which Thomas Wells and Priority Payout Corp. have signed. Plaintiff will submit the proposed final settlement to the FTC Commissioners for review. Counsel are informed and believe that it will likely take between eight and twelve weeks to secure this approval. If the FTC Commissioners approve the proposed final settlement, counsel will file the stipulated final order for the Court's approval. If the FTC Commissioners do not approve the proposed final settlement, and the parties are unable to agree on revisions sufficient to secure such approval, counsel will promptly notify the Court.

Approval of the Parties' proposed final settlement by the Commission, and its entry by this Court, will render the hearing unnecessary. A continuance of the hearing to allow time for the settlement to be approved will avoid potentially-unnecessary costs to the Parties and serve the interests of judicial efficiency.

For these reasons, the Parties request that the Court continue the January 8, 2019 hearing until March 26, 2019, or such other date thereafter as may be convenient for the Court.

There is good cause for the Court to continue the hearing. This is the Parties' second stipulation and request to extend the hearing date, and is not sought for reasons of delay or for any improper purpose.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that the Parties shall have the option to appear for the hearing on the Emergency Motion for Protective Order by telephone.

SO STIPULATED AND AGREED:

[PROPOSED] ORDER

For good cause appearing, the Parties' foregoing stipulation is GRANTED. It is ORDERED that the hearing scheduled in this matter for January 8, 2019 at 1:45 p.m. is VACATED, and such hearing is re-set to the date and time set forth below:

Date: February 5, 2019 Time: 1:45 p.m.

Additionally, the Parties' counsel shall have permission to appear telephonically at this rescheduled hearing, and shall make arrangements with chambers for such telephonic appearances before the hearing date.

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