Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Saticoy Bay LLC, 2:17-cv-00780-RFB-GWF. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170711b60 Visitors: 6
Filed: Jul. 10, 2017
Latest Update: Jul. 10, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS (SECOND REQUEST) RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II , District Judge . Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo") and Defendant Saticoy Bay LLC, Series 1851 Hillpointe Rd ("Saticoy", collectively with Wells Fargo, the "Parties") hereby stipulate and agree that Wells Fargo's opposition to Saticoy's Motion to Dismiss ("Motion to Dismiss", ECF No. 13), which is currently due July 13, 2017, may be extended to August 3, 2017. Well
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS

(SECOND REQUEST)

Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo") and Defendant Saticoy Bay LLC, Series 1851 Hillpointe Rd ("Saticoy", collectively with Wells Fargo, the "Parties") hereby stipulate and agree that Wells Fargo's opposition to Saticoy's Motion to Dismiss ("Motion to Dismiss", ECF No. 13), which is currently due July 13, 2017, may be extended to August 3, 2017.

Wells Fargo is in the process of assessing the Motion to Dismiss and the arguments raised therein. Further, the undersigned counsel needs to attend to some family medical issues over the next couple weeks. Accordingly, additional time will be required to respond to the arguments. Wells Fargo is also assessing recent decisions and orders from other Courts that may have an effect on its response to the Motion to Dismiss. Accordingly, good cause exists for the extension.

Based on the foregoing, the Parties respectfully request that the Court grant this Stipulation.

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