Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

MARTINOVSKY v. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, 3:16-cv-00403-MMC. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160707i41 Visitors: 6
Filed: Jul. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Jul. 06, 2016
Summary: STIPULATED REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT; ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION MAXINE M. CHESNEY , District Judge . Plaintiffs GARY MARTINOVSKY, M.D., and INTEGRATED PAIN CARE, INC., and Defendants COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, NANCY E. O'MALLEY, JOHN PAUL WILLIAMS, EDDIE BERMUDEZ, and FERNANDO CUBANGBANG, (hereinafter "Defendants,") by and through their counsel of record, hereby represent to the Court as follows: WHEREAS, on January 22, 2016, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint in the a
More

STIPULATED REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT; ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION

Plaintiffs GARY MARTINOVSKY, M.D., and INTEGRATED PAIN CARE, INC., and Defendants COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, NANCY E. O'MALLEY, JOHN PAUL WILLIAMS, EDDIE BERMUDEZ, and FERNANDO CUBANGBANG, (hereinafter "Defendants,") by and through their counsel of record, hereby represent to the Court as follows:

WHEREAS, on January 22, 2016, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint in the above captioned action;

WHEREAS, pursuant to an agreed-upon extension of time, on April 7, 2016, Defendants County of Alameda, Nancy E. O'Malley, John Paul Williams, and Eddie Bermudez (hereinafter "COUNTY Defendants,") filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint and, in the alternative, Motion for a More Definite Statement;

WHEREAS, pursuant to an agreed-upon extension of time, on April 8, 2016, Defendant Cubangbang filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Complaint and, in the alternative, a Request to Stay the matter.

WHEREAS, on May 20, 2016, a hearing on the Motions to Dismiss, Motion for a More Definite Statement, and Request to Stay was held, and as to Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, the Motions were granted without leave to amend in part and with leave to amend in part.

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs were given until June 24, 2016 to file a First Amended Complaint;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint in the above captioned action was filed and served on COUNTY Defendants on June 24, 2016, requiring a response date of July 8, 2016

WHEREAS, attorney for COUNTY Defendants, Michael C. Wenzel was on vacation from June 20, 2016 to June 27, 2016;

WHEREAS, the Initial Case Management Conference is not scheduled until September 16, 2016;

WHEREAS, a pre-trial diversion Order was entered in the underlying criminal proceedings related to this action, potentially impacting whether a brief stay may be appropriate in this action, which is not set to terminate prior to August 31, 2016;

WHEREAS, extending the date for Defendants to respond to the First Amended Complaint will not alter the date of any event or deadline already fixed by Court order;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to court approval, by and between the undersigned counsel on behalf of the parties that Defendants will file and serve a response to the First Amended Complaint on or before July 25, 2016.

It is so stipulated and agreed.

ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFORE, and the parties' having stipulated to the same, the parties' stipulation is hereby APPROVED. Defendants will file and serve a response to the First Amended Complaint on or before July 25, 2016.

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