Filed: Aug. 04, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 04, 2015
Summary: UNOPPOSED MOTION TO RESCHEDULE THE DATE FOR DEFENDANTS TO ANSWER THE COMPLAINT MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . Defendants Raritan Inc. and Raritan Americas, Inc. (collectively and together, "Defendants") respectfully move this Court to extend the date for Defendants to answer the Complaint by 30 days to September 3, 2015. Defendants are authorized to represent that Plaintiff Server Technology, Inc. ("STI") agrees to this extension. A Proposed Order is attached as Exhibit A. In support of
Summary: UNOPPOSED MOTION TO RESCHEDULE THE DATE FOR DEFENDANTS TO ANSWER THE COMPLAINT MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . Defendants Raritan Inc. and Raritan Americas, Inc. (collectively and together, "Defendants") respectfully move this Court to extend the date for Defendants to answer the Complaint by 30 days to September 3, 2015. Defendants are authorized to represent that Plaintiff Server Technology, Inc. ("STI") agrees to this extension. A Proposed Order is attached as Exhibit A. In support of t..
More
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO RESCHEDULE THE DATE FOR DEFENDANTS TO ANSWER THE COMPLAINT
MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.
Defendants Raritan Inc. and Raritan Americas, Inc. (collectively and together, "Defendants") respectfully move this Court to extend the date for Defendants to answer the Complaint by 30 days to September 3, 2015. Defendants are authorized to represent that Plaintiff Server Technology, Inc. ("STI") agrees to this extension. A Proposed Order is attached as Exhibit A.
In support of this motion, Defendants state as follows:
1. On June 22, 2015, STI filed the Complaint in this case against Defendants. On June 29, 2015, STI filed an Amended Complaint in this case against Defendants. A summons was issued as to Raritan Inc. on June 23, 2015 and returned on July 22, 2015. A summons was issued as to Raritan Americas, Inc. on June 23, 2015 and returned on July 22, 2015. The date for Defendants to answer the Complaint is originally set for August 4, 2015.
2. The parties subsequently met and conferred regarding the case schedule. Thereafter, counsel for STI agreed to a 30-day extension of time for Defendants to answer or otherwise plead in response to the Complaint.
3. Accordingly, the parties are in agreement that Defendants should have until and including September 3, 2015 to answer or otherwise plead in response to the Complaint. September 3, 2015 is thirty (30) days from August 4, 2015, the date on which Defendants' answer was originally due in this case.
4. This is the first request for an extension of time with respect to STI's Amended Complaint.
5. A Proposed Order granting this 30-day extension is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
For those reasons, Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter the Proposed Order, rescheduling the date for Defendants to answer or otherwise plead in response to the Complaint to September 3, 2015.
[PROPOSED] ORDER OF THE COURT
Upon review of the Unopposed Motion to Reschedule The Date For Defendants to Answer the Complaint (the "Motion"), the Court hereby GRANTS the Motion, and orders that the date for Defendants to answer the Complaint is rescheduled to September 3, 2015.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
