Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

TOP AGENT NETWORK, INC. v. ZILLOW, INC., 4:14-cv-04769-KAW. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20141118973 Visitors: 13
Filed: Nov. 17, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 17, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR ZILLOW'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT AND TAN'S RESPONSE TO SAME KANDIS A. WESTMORE, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Top Agent Network, Inc. ("TAN") and Defendant Zillow, Inc. ("Zillow") have met and conferred, reached agreement, and hereby stipulate as follows: STIPULATION WHEREAS, plaintiff filed the instant action on October 27, 2014; and WHEREAS, the complaint and summons were served on Zillow's agent for service of process, by personal se
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR ZILLOW'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT AND TAN'S RESPONSE TO SAME

KANDIS A. WESTMORE, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Top Agent Network, Inc. ("TAN") and Defendant Zillow, Inc. ("Zillow") have met and conferred, reached agreement, and hereby stipulate as follows:

STIPULATION

WHEREAS, plaintiff filed the instant action on October 27, 2014; and

WHEREAS, the complaint and summons were served on Zillow's agent for service of process, by personal service, on October 29, 2014; and

WHEREAS, Zillow's response to the complaint is currently due on or before November 19, 2014; and

WHEREAS, defense counsel has upcoming trials and other scheduling commitments and requires an extension to have sufficient time to address the matters at issue; and

WHEREAS, there have been no previous time modifications in the case; and

WHEREAS, the time modification would have no major effect on the as yet to be determined case schedule and would allow the parties sufficient time to address the matters at issue in light of counsels' other scheduling commitments;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between TAN and Zillow, through their respective counsel of record, that Zillow's deadline to file a response to the complaint is extended by 30 days from November 19, 2014, to December 19, 2014.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that (1) in the event that Zillow's responsive pleading requires a response by TAN, TAN's deadline to respond is extended from 21 days to 30 days; and (2) in the event that Zillow files a motion in response to TAN's complaint, TAN may have 30 days to file any opposition to Zillow's motion as opposed to the 14 days provided by Civil Local Rule 7-3(a). These extensions will allow TAN to have a full and fair opportunity to respond, particularly in light of the upcoming Christmas and New Year holidays. In the event that Zillow does file a motion, the parties further agree to meet and confer regarding the hearing date for any motion, so as to allow the Court sufficient time to consider the motion in light of the extension.

DECLARATION OF OLEG ELKHUNOVICH, ESQ. IN SUPPORT OF STIPULATION EXTENDING TIME FOR ZILLOW'S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT AND TAN'S RESPONSE TO SAME

I, Oleg Elkhunovich, Esq., hereby declare as follows:

1. I am member of the California State Bar, an attorney in the law firm of Susman Godfrey LLP, and counsel for Defendants in the above-captioned appeal. I submit this declaration in support of the stipulation and [proposed] order extending time for Zillow's response to complaint and TAN's response to same.

2. On October 27, 2014, plaintiff filed the instant action.

3. The defendant, my client, was served on October 29, 2014.

4. Zillow's response to the complaint is currently due on or before November 19, 2014.

5. Defense counsel in this case currently has trials scheduled for both early December 2014 and January 2015.

6. In light of these trials, defense counsel requires an extension to have sufficient time to address the matters at issue in the complaint.

7. There have been no previous time modifications in the case.

8. The time modification would have no major effect on the as yet to be determined case schedule and would allow the parties sufficient time to address the matters at issue in light of counsels' other scheduling commitments.

9. Counsel for the Plaintiff has agreed to the extension.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, 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