Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Ditech Financial LLC v. TBR I, LLC, 3:16-cv-00227-MMD-WGC. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20190212b88 Visitors: 15
Filed: Feb. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 11, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE RESPONSE AND REPLY AND EXTEND DEADLINES TO FILE RESPONSE/REPLY BRIEF SUPPORTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION (First Request) MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . Ditech Financial LLC f/k/a Green Tree Servicing LLC and Federal National Mortgage Association ( Plaintiffs ), Stonefield II Homeowners Association ( Stonefield ), and Airmotive Investments LLC ( Airmotive ), by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate as follows: 1. On November 20, 2018
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE RESPONSE AND REPLY AND EXTEND DEADLINES TO FILE RESPONSE/REPLY BRIEF SUPPORTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION (First Request)

Ditech Financial LLC f/k/a Green Tree Servicing LLC and Federal National Mortgage Association (Plaintiffs), Stonefield II Homeowners Association (Stonefield), and Airmotive Investments LLC (Airmotive), by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate as follows:

1. On November 20, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment [ECF #60]. A response was due on December 11, 2018.

2. On December 11, 2018, the parties stipulated to extend the responsive deadline for 30 days [ECF #62].

3. This Court granted the parties' stipulation, and ordered that any opposition to the motion would be extended until January 11, 2019 [ECF #64]

4. On December 12, 2018, Stonefield filed a response to Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment [ECF No. 63] and Plaintiffs filed their reply on December 21, 2018 [ECF No. 66].

5. As a result of the holidays and family obligations, and that Airmotive's counsel had been required to prepare several appellate briefs and respond to numerous summary judgment motions filed in various cases, Airmotive's counsel and Plaintiffs' counsel stipulated to extend Airmotive's response deadline [ECF No. 67].

6. This Court granted the parties' stipulation, and ordered that Airmotive's deadline to file an opposition to the motion would be extended until January 25, 2019 [ECF No. 68].

7. On January 25, 2019, Airmotive filed its response to Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment [ECF No. 69]. Plaintiffs' reply is due February 8, 2019.

8. Also on January 25, 2019, Airmotive filed its own motion for partial summary judgment [ECF No. 70]. Plaintiffs' response is due February 15, 2019.

9. The parties stipulate that Plaintiffs will file a consolidated response and reply to include a response to Airmotive's motion for partial summary judgment and a reply supporting Plaintiffs' own motion for partial summary judgment.

10. The parties stipulate Plaintiffs shall file their consolidated response/reply by February 15, 2019.

11. This is the first request for an extension of time on Plaintiffs' reply deadline.

12. The parties agree this extension is not intended to cause delay or prejudice, but to accommodate counsel's schedule and to preserve counsel and judicial resources by consolidating the response and reply.

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