Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

The Bank of New York Mellon v. Highland Ranch Homeowners Association, 3:17-cv-00115-LRH-VPC. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180619b54 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jun. 18, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 18, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Second Request) LARRY R. HICKS , District Judge . COMES NOW Plaintiff, THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWALT, INC., ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2007-AL1, MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2007-AL1, and Defendant, AIRMOTIVE INVESTMENTS, LLC, by and through their undersigned counsel, and hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 1. On April 25, 201
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Second Request)

COMES NOW Plaintiff, THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWALT, INC., ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2007-AL1, MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES SERIES 2007-AL1, and Defendant, AIRMOTIVE INVESTMENTS, LLC, by and through their undersigned counsel, and hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

1. On April 25, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Summary Judgment herein [ECF #34]. 2. On June 1, 2018, the parties submitted a stipulation to extend the deadline to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment until June 15, 2018. [ECF #37]. Said Stipulation was granted on June 4, 2018. [ECF #38]. 3. Defendant's counsel has been required to devote time and attention to numerous other pending legal matters since the filing of the Motion for Summary Judgment which detracted from the time available prepare a response. 4. In addition, since the granting of the first extension, Defendant's counsel suffered a family emergency that necessitated significant time out of the office. This has created a backlog of work. 5. Based upon the foregoing, Defendant has requested and shall be granted a further extension of time until July 16, 2018, in which to respond to the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. 6. Plaintiff shall have an extended period of time until August 16, 2018, in which to file any Reply. 7. This Stipulation is made in good faith and not for purpose of delay.

IT IS SO ORDERED, nunc pro tunc.

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