Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hemmert v. Finn, 15-4904 WHO. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20161003900 Visitors: 7
Filed: Sep. 30, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 30, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFFS TO FILE OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WILLIAM H. ORRICK , District Judge . RECITAL Whereas Plaintiffs Sven Hemmert and Sue-Ellen Speight (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed their First Amended Complaint on December 14, 2015 against the United States of America ("the United States") and the David and Amy Finn (collectively, "Finn Defendants"); Whereas the Court previously approved the parties'
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFFS TO FILE OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

RECITAL

Whereas Plaintiffs Sven Hemmert and Sue-Ellen Speight (collectively, "Plaintiffs") filed their First Amended Complaint on December 14, 2015 against the United States of America ("the United States") and the David and Amy Finn (collectively, "Finn Defendants");

Whereas the Court previously approved the parties' stipulation to Continue the Deadline for Responses to First Amended Complaint and Case Management Conference in Light of Agreement to Mediate Case in Docket No. 23 and approved another stipulation in Docket No.33;

Whereas the Court previously approved the stipulation submitted on behalf of the United States and Plaintiffs to continue the Set Briefing and Hearing Schedule on Federal Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and To Continue Case Management Conference Date (Docket No. 43)

Whereas discussions about resolving this matter has involved discussions of various plans that require input from expert consultants and others that is time consuming;

Whereas the United States and Plaintiffs have reached agreement in principle to settle this matter as between them;

Whereas a draft of a settlement agreement between Plaintiffs and the United States is currently being circulated and finalized and Plaintiffs and the United States desire to memorialize the resolution of some or all of the claims in this case rather than engaging in motion practice at this time;

Whereas the Plaintiffs' opposition to the United States of America's motion to dismiss is currently due on September 30, 2016 and both the United States and Plaintiffs expect resolution between them is likely to occur and be memorialized soon, the United States and Plaintiffs agreed and request of this Court that that the Plaintiffs' deadline to file an opposition to United States Motion to Dismiss be extended until October 13, 2016 to allow for the finalization of Settlement documents; and

Whereas the dates for the reply brief for the United States (October 21, 2016) and hearing date November 16, 2016) shall remain in place in case settlement is not able to be reached.

STIPULATION

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective attorneys of record that the Plaintiffs shall have until October 13, 2016 to file its opposition to the United States' Motion to Dismiss

IT IS SO STIPULATED,

PURUSANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

The Plaintiffs shall have until October 13, 2016 to respond to the United States' Motion to Dismiss.

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