Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

KASELITZ v. HISOFT TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, LTD., 12-cv-5760-MMC. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160115q01 Visitors: 1
Filed: Jan. 15, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 15, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEFS IN SUPPORT OF CROSS-MOTIONS TO VACATE IN PART AND TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD MAXINE M. CHESNEY , District Judge . WHEREAS pursuant to a briefing schedule agreed to by the parties, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award in Part on January 8, 2016, and Defendant hiSoft Technology International, Ltd., simultaneously filed a Motion to Confirm the Arbitration Award, and the parties have notic
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEFS IN SUPPORT OF CROSS-MOTIONS TO VACATE IN PART AND TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

WHEREAS pursuant to a briefing schedule agreed to by the parties, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award in Part on January 8, 2016, and Defendant hiSoft Technology International, Ltd., simultaneously filed a Motion to Confirm the Arbitration Award, and the parties have noticed their respective cross-motions for hearing on February 26, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.;

WHEREAS the parties have agreed to file their respective oppositions to the cross-motions on January 22, 2016, in accordance with Local Rule 7-3;

WHEREAS under Local Rule 7-3, the parties' reply briefs in support of their respective motions would be due on January 29, 2016;

WHEREAS due to the unavailability of Plaintiffs' attorneys Michael Rubin and Eileen Goldsmith on January 29, 2016, and because those attorneys have primary responsibility for drafting Plaintiffs' reply brief, the parties have agreed that their respective reply briefs shall be due on February 3, 2016;

WHEREAS the agreed-upon due date for reply briefs is 23 days before the parties have noticed their cross-motions for hearing,

The parties hereby stipulate as follows:

1. The deadline for the parties to file their respective reply briefs shall be February 3, 2016.

ECF CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), the filing attorney attests that she has obtained concurrence regarding the filing of this document from the signatories to the document.

[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