Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Nokchan v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 15-CV-03009-EMC. (2015)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20150824669 Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 21, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6-1, the parties, through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree that Defendants Uber Technologies, Inc. ("Uber"), Rasier, LLC ("Rasier"), and Hirease LLC ("Hirease") (collectively "Defendants") may have until fourteen (14) days after the Court's ruling on the motion to consolidate in Gillette v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 14-cv-
More

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6-1, the parties, through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree that Defendants Uber Technologies, Inc. ("Uber"), Rasier, LLC ("Rasier"), and Hirease LLC ("Hirease") (collectively "Defendants") may have until fourteen (14) days after the Court's ruling on the motion to consolidate in Gillette v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 14-cv-05241 (ECF No. 84) or the filing of a Consolidated Complaint that includes the captioned matter, whichever is later, to file their answer, motion or other response to the Complaint of Plaintiff Michael Nokchan in the captioned matter.

Plaintiff filed his Complaint on June 29, 2015. On July 24th, Plaintiff and Defendants Uber and Rasier stipulated for an extension of time to respond to the Complaint until August 13, 2015. Defendants Uber and Rasier received an additional extension of time to respond until August 21, 2015 to meet and confer in good faith regarding the most efficient way to proceed in light of this Court's previous rulings in the related cases of Gillette v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 14-cv-05241 and Mohamed v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 14-cv-5200. Subsequent to that stipulation, Ronald Gillette filed a motion to consolidate the Gillette, Mohamed, and Nokchan litigation. As a result of that motion and the parties' meet and confer efforts, they now agree the most efficient course is to await the final outcome of the motion to consolidate before Defendants are required to respond to the Complaint in this matter and Plaintiff Nokchan is required to take further action. Furthermore, Hirease's original responsive pleading deadline is August 31, 2015, and has obtained no previous extensions of time to respond. No objections, arguments, or defenses are waived by any party by virtue of this stipulation. This stipulation will not require the alteration of any deadline already set by Court Order. Indeed, the Court's August 3, 2015 Order (ECF No. 19) set the initial case management conference for this matter for November 12, 2015.

In compliance with Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), Plaintiff's counsel, Shaun Setareh, and Hirease's counsel, Timothy Hix, has concurred in this filing and use of their electronic signatures below.

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