Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

McKINLEY v. CitiMORTGAGE, INC., 2:13-CV-01057-TLN-CKD. (2013)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20130808654 Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 07, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 07, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND RELATED DEADLINES AND EFFECT OF TRO TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. COME NOW Defendant CITIMORTGAGE, INC. ("CMI"), Defendant NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES, INC. ("Northwest") and Plaintiffs ROGER J.B. McKINLEY and CARON D. McKINLEY ("Plaintiffs")(collectively the "Parties") hereby stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction is currently set for hearing before this Court
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND RELATED DEADLINES AND EFFECT OF TRO

TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

COME NOW Defendant CITIMORTGAGE, INC. ("CMI"), Defendant NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES, INC. ("Northwest") and Plaintiffs ROGER J.B. McKINLEY and CARON D. McKINLEY ("Plaintiffs")(collectively the "Parties") hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction is currently set for hearing before this Court on August 22, 2013;

WHEREAS, Defendant CMI is still in the process of obtaining and reviewing information that may be pertinent to a determination on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction;

WHEREAS, in order for the Court to make the most informed decision with regard to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, CMI requests additional time in which to file any Opposition it may file to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction;

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that a continuance of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction up to and including September 19, 2013 or the soonest available date thereafter that is convenient to the Court would be appropriate based upon the above circumstances;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that the TRO which is currently in effect remain in effect until a determination on the above Motion for Preliminary Injunction;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that the above request for continuance is likely to facilitate ongoing discussions pertaining to potential resolution of the action.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties stipulate and agree that Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction shall be continued to Thursday, September 19, 2013, or the soonest available date thereafter that is convenient to the Court. The Parties further stipulate that all deadlines dependent upon the Motion Hearing date, including the deadlines to file an Opposition and Reply brief shall be continued in accordance with the new hearing date. Finally, the parties stipulate that the TRO which is currently in effect remain in effect until a determination on the above Motion for Preliminary Injunction.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

The Court, having reviewed the stipulation and [proposed] order to continue the hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction and related deadlines, and to extend the effect of the TRO, and good cause appearing therefore, makes the following Order:

The hearing on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction currently scheduled for August 22, 2012 at 2:00 p.m., is hereby continued to September 19, 2013, at 2:00 p.m., and all deadlines dependent upon the Motion Hearing date, including the deadlines to file an Opposition and Reply brief shall be continued in accordance with the new hearing date. Furthermore, the parties stipulate that the TRO which is currently in effect remain in effect until a determination on the above Motion for Preliminary Injunction.

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