Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

TZU TECHNOLOGIES, LLC v. LELO INC., 2:17-cv-01952-MMD-GWF. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20171114c87 Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 13, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 13, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (Second Stipulation [LR IA 6-1(a)] GEORGE FOLEY, JR. , Magistrate Judge . Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6-1(a), Plaintiff [Cif TZU Technologies, LLC ("Plaintiff") and Defendant Lelo Inc. ("Defendant") (jointly "the Parties"), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed its Complaint against Defendant on July 18, 2017 (ECF No. 1); WHEREAS Defendant was served with the sum
More

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT (Second Stipulation [LR IA 6-1(a)]

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6-1(a), Plaintiff[CifTZU Technologies, LLC ("Plaintiff") and Defendant Lelo Inc. ("Defendant") (jointly "the Parties"), by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed its Complaint against Defendant on July 18, 2017 (ECF No. 1);

WHEREAS Defendant was served with the summons and complaint on September 22, 2017;

WHEREAS Defendant was required to serve its respective answer and/or response to the Complaint by October 13, 2017;

WHEREAS Plaintiff and Defendant jointly stipulated to a first extension of time to answer and/or respond to the Complaint and the Court granted the stipulated request extending the time for Defendant's answer and/or response to the Complaint to November 13, 2017 (first extension)(ECF No. 13);

WHEREAS Plaintiff and Defendant have been engaged in informal settlement discussions in an attempt to resolve their dispute and wish to continue such discussions;

WHEREAS Plaintiff and Defendant have again agreed to extend the date for Defendant to answer and/or respond to the Complaint by an additional thirty (30) days, up to and including December 13, 2017; and

WHEREAS this is Defendant' second request for extension of time to respond to the Complaint in this action;

WHEREAS the stipulation is made in good faith to allow the parties to continue to discuss a settlement agreement; and

WHEREAS the stipulation is not an attempt to delay proceedings.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their respective counsel, that Defendant Lelo Inc. shall have an extension, up to and including December 13, 2017, to answer and/or respond to Plaintiff's Complaint in this action.

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