STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

(SECOND REQUEST)

GEORGE FOLEY, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Kevin Zimmerman ("Plaintiff") and Defendant, PetSmart, Inc. ("PetSmart") by and through their undersigned counsel (collectively the "Parties"), for good cause shown, hereby stipulate and agree to extend PetSmart's deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint [Doc #1] to July 24, 2017. This is the Parties' second extension request.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) and Local Rule 6-1, there exists good cause to grant this extension to respond for the following reasons:

1. Plaintiff served the Complaint and Summons on PetSmart on May 4, 2017.

2. The Parties previously stipulated to extend PetSmart's response deadline, and PetSmart's response is currently due June 8, 2017.

3. Today, the Parties reached an agreement on the majority of the terms regarding settlement in all four cases filed by Mr. Zimmerman against PetSmart, including this matter. The Parties expect to have a formal settlement finalized and an agreement drafted in the near term.

4. The Parties respectfully request a forty-five (45) day extension up to and including July 24, 2017 for PetSmart to respond to the Complaint. Given the length of the requested extension, the parties believe they can execute a formal settlement agreement and likely effect of the dismissal of the four actions, including this one, by its expiration.

5. The Parties agreed to the extension requested herein.

6. This stipulated extension request is sought in good faith and is not made for the purpose of delay.

Therefore, the Parties jointly agree to extend PetSmart's deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint to July 24, 2017.

ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that PetSmart shall respond to Plaintiff's Complaint on or before July 24, 2017.