Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

(PS) Bradley v. County of San Joaquin, 2:17-CV-2313-KJM-AC. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180104957 Visitors: 3
Filed: Jan. 03, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 03, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . RECITALS A. On November 3, 2017, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit, pro se. B. On November 29, 2017, attorney Jeff Dominic Price filed a Notice of Appearance as counsel for Plaintiff. C. On or about December 11, 2017, Plaintiff served process on Defendants. D. Defendants' counsel requested a 30-day extension of time to move, plead, or otherwise respond to the Complaint. Plaintiff's
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

RECITALS

A. On November 3, 2017, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit, pro se.

B. On November 29, 2017, attorney Jeff Dominic Price filed a Notice of Appearance as counsel for Plaintiff.

C. On or about December 11, 2017, Plaintiff served process on Defendants.

D. Defendants' counsel requested a 30-day extension of time to move, plead, or otherwise respond to the Complaint. Plaintiff's counsel is agreeable with such extension on the condition that if Defendants file a motion to dismiss, then on request by Plaintiff they will stipulate to allow Plaintiff to file a First Amended Complaint.

STIPULATION

THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by the parties, through their counsel of record, as follows:

1. Defendants have an extension of time, through and including February 1, 2018, to move, plead, or otherwise respond to the Complaint.

2. If any Defendant files a motion to dismiss, then on request by Plaintiff Defendants will stipulate to allow Plaintiff to file a First Amended Complaint.

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