Corsaro v. Bank of America, N.A., 2:15-cv-02256-RCJ-NJK. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20160526d21
Visitors: 7
Filed: May 25, 2016
Latest Update: May 25, 2016
Summary: ORDER (Docket No. 20) NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend the time for Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC to respond to the complaint. Docket No. 20. That deadline expired more than six months ago, on December 20, 2015. See Docket No. 19. The stipulation fails to establish excusable neglect for the failure to timely seek an extension. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B). Nor does the stipulation establish good cause for the e
Summary: ORDER (Docket No. 20) NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend the time for Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC to respond to the complaint. Docket No. 20. That deadline expired more than six months ago, on December 20, 2015. See Docket No. 19. The stipulation fails to establish excusable neglect for the failure to timely seek an extension. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B). Nor does the stipulation establish good cause for the ex..
More
ORDER
(Docket No. 20)
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend the time for Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC to respond to the complaint. Docket No. 20. That deadline expired more than six months ago, on December 20, 2015. See Docket No. 19. The stipulation fails to establish excusable neglect for the failure to timely seek an extension. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B). Nor does the stipulation establish good cause for the extension sought, see, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1), asserting that additional time is needed to discuss settlement without any explanation why the preceding seven months following effectuation of service has been an insufficient period. Accordingly, the stipulation is DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
