Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DELOSH v. STATE, DIVISION OF PRISONERS, 2:14-cv-00632-APG-GWF. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20150515a23 Visitors: 1
Filed: May 08, 2015
Latest Update: May 08, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . Pursuant to LR 6-1, Plaintiff, STEVEN DELOSH, by and through his counsel of record Michael C. Kane, Esq. of The 702 Firm and Cal J. Potter, III, Esq. and C. J. Potter, IV, Esq. of Potter Law Offices and Defendants, named above, by and through their counsel of record, Andrea R. Barraclough, Deputy Attorney General, hereby stipulate and re
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Pursuant to LR 6-1, Plaintiff, STEVEN DELOSH, by and through his counsel of record Michael C. Kane, Esq. of The 702 Firm and Cal J. Potter, III, Esq. and C. J. Potter, IV, Esq. of Potter Law Offices and Defendants, named above, by and through their counsel of record, Andrea R. Barraclough, Deputy Attorney General, hereby stipulate and request that the scheduled date of filing of Plaintiff's Responses to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [doc. 42] and Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. 43] currently due on Monday, May 4, 2015 be extended fourteen (14) days, up to and including Monday, May 18, 2015.

Plaintiff submits that good cause exists for this extension as Plaintiff is in the process of retaining and associating Cal J. Potter, III, Esq. and C. J. Potter, IV, Esq. as co-counsel in this matter, but at the present time, Potter Law Offices has not had sufficient time to review this matter and/or prepare the appropriate responses.

Based upon the foregoing, the parties request that this Court order the time for the Plaintiff to file his Responses to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [doc. 42] and Motion for Summary Judgment [doc. 43] to Monday, May 18, 2015. The parties also request that this Court provide a concomitant enlargement of time for the Defendants' Reply thereto.

This is the first request for enlargement of time to file the Response and first request for enlargement of time to file the Responses. This request is made in good faith and not for the purposes of delay.

ORDER

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