Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Moore v. Toledo, 1:14-cv-00882___SAB. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20140826707 Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 25, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 25, 2014
Summary: SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT DEAN MURPHY'S DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT; and, STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge. WHEREAS, the responsive pleading of defendant, Dean Murphy ("Murphy"), is currently due on August 22, 2014 as the result of a stipulation which extended his deadline to respond by not more than 28 days; WHEREAS, the scheduling conference in this matter is currently set for September 16,
More

SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEFENDANT DEAN MURPHY'S DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT; and, STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE MANDATORY SCHEDULING CONFERENCE

STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.

WHEREAS, the responsive pleading of defendant, Dean Murphy ("Murphy"), is currently due on August 22, 2014 as the result of a stipulation which extended his deadline to respond by not more than 28 days;

WHEREAS, the scheduling conference in this matter is currently set for September 16, 2014;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff, Ronald Moore, and Defendants, Murphy and Marisela Toledo ("Toledo," and together with Murphy, "Defendants") wish additional time to attempt resolution of the matter without incurring fees and costs associated with filing further responsive pleadings and preparing for and attending the scheduling conference as currently scheduled; WHEREAS, the parties wish to conserve the Court's resources and time and not unnecessarily burden the Court with a matter that will likely be informally resolved;

WHEREAS, an inspection of the subject property by a certified California access specialist has taken place and Defendants are in the process of developing a plan for remediation of the access issues identified and, due to various limitations of the subject property, the remediation plan may require substantial input from consultants as well as creative resolutions, all of which will take some time to accomplish;

WHEREAS, the parties agree that once the remediation plan is complete, it is likely that the case will settle without further use of the Court's resources and time;

NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff, RONALD MOORE, through his attorney of record, and Defendants, MARISELA TOLEDO aka MARISELA TOLEDO GONZALEZ dba TOLEDITO'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT, through her attorney of record, and, DEAN MURPHY, who is presently self-represented, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. That the Mandatory Scheduling Conference that was scheduled by the court for September 16, 2014 at 9:15 a.m. be continued to a date after October 28, 2014 at the Court's convenience; and.

2. That Defendant DEAN MURPHY'S time to respond to the Complaint be extended to October 14, 2014 which extension exceeds 28 days from the initial deadline.

ORDER

The Parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Dean Murphy's response to the Complaint be filed no later than October 14, 2014.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Mandatory Scheduling Conference currently set for September 16, 2014 be continued to October 28, 2014 at 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 9 before Magistrate Stanley A. Boone. The parties are directed to file their joint scheduling report no later than seven (7) days prior to the scheduling conference.

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