DEFENDANTS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR ALL DEFENDANTS TO FILE AND SERVE THEIR ANSWERS OR OTHER RESPONSES TO THE COMPLAINT

(Fourth Request)

CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.

Pursuant to LR IA 6-1, Defendants A Morton Brothers Joint Management, LLC, A Morton Brothers Joint, LLC, A Morton Brothers Joint Intellectual Property, LLC, Michael Morton, and David Morton (together, "Defendants") hereby move the Court for entry of an order extending the time, through and including June 2, 2017, for all Defendants to file and serve an answer or other response to the Complaint. This is Defendants' fourth request for a 1-week extension of time. In support of their motion, Defendants state the following:

1. Plaintiff filed its Complaint on April 13, 2017.

2. The three corporate defendants (A Morton Brothers Joint Management, LLC, A Morton Brothers Joint, LLC, and A Morton Brothers Joint Intellectual Property, LLC) were each served with the Summons and Complaint on April 14, 2017, making their deadline to file and serve an answer or other response to the Complaint May 5, 2017. See ECF Nos. 21-23; Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A) ("A defendant must serve an answer: (i) within 21 days after being served with the summons and complaint"). Defendant Michael Morton was served on April 17, 2017, making his deadline to file and serve an answer or other response to the Complaint May 8, 2017. See ECF No. 25; Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A). And Defendant David Morton was served on April 19, 2017, making his deadline to file and serve an answer or other response to the Complaint May 10, 2017. See ECF No. 26; Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A).

3. The parties have been and are currently engaged in productive settlement negotiations that are likely to shortly resolve this action.

4. On May 4, 2017, Plaintiff's counsel provided Defendants' counsel with a proposed settlement agreement.

5. On May 5, 2017, Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff would not oppose a motion filed by Defendants to extend the deadline for all Defendants to file and serve their answer or other response to the Complaint to May 12, 2017. Defendants filed the unopposed motion on May 5, 2017. (See ECF No. 30.)

6. The parties' settlement negotiations continued.

7. On May 10, 2017, Defendants' counsel forwarded a revised proposed settlement agreement to Plaintiff's counsel.

8. On May 11, Defendants' counsel asked whether Plaintiff's counsel would oppose a second extension of time for Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff would not oppose a second extension of time until May 19, 2017. Accordingly, on May 12, 2017, Defendants' counsel filed a second unopposed motion. (See ECF No. 31.) The Court granted the motion on May 12, 2017, extending the time for all Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint to May 19, 2017. (See ECF No. 32.)

9. The parties' settlement negotiations continued.

10. On May 15, 2017, Plaintiff's counsel sent revisions to the draft settlement agreement to Defendants' counsel. On May 16, 2017, Defendants' counsel sent further revisions to the settlement agreement to Plaintiff's counsel. On May 19, Plaintiff's counsel sent further revisions to the settlement agreement to Defendants' counsel. On that same date, Plaintiff's counsel filed an unopposed motion seeking an extension of time for all Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint to May 26, 2017. (ECF No. 33.) The Court granted the motion. (ECF No. 34.)

11. On May 23, 2017, Defendants' counsel sent a revised settlement draft to Plaintiff's counsel, and on May 25, 2017, Plaintiff's counsel and Defendants' counsel discussed the revisions by telephone. During the call, Defendants' undersigned counsel indicated that he would need to discuss the points made by Plaintiff's counsel during the call with Defendants and Defendants' lead counsel, Mr. McCue, who was out of the country attending the 2017 International Trademark Association annual meeting in Barcelona, Spain. In light of the foregoing, Defendants' counsel asked Plaintiff's counsel whether Plaintiff would agree not to oppose a fourth request for a 1-week extension of time. Later that day, Plaintiff's counsel sent Defendants' counsel an email indicating that Plaintiff would not oppose an additional one week extension of time.

12. The parties believe they are very close to finalizing the settlement agreement. Given the parties' progress towards settlement, the absence of Defendants' lead counsel from the country, and the current May 26 deadline for all Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint, Defendants' undersigned counsel asked whether Plaintiff's counsel would oppose a third extension of time for Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. Plaintiff's counsel indicated that Plaintiff would not oppose a third extension of time until May 26, 2017.

13. Accordingly, in light of the parties' active settlement negotiations, Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter an order extending the deadline to and including June 2, 2017, for all Defendants to file and serve an answer or other response to the Complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.