Filed: Jan. 04, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' RENEWED RULE 12 MOTIONS (ECF Nos. 136, 137, and 138 MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Pedro Rosales-Martinez ("Plaintiff"), and Defendants Washoe County, Heidi Poe, City of Reno, Colby Palmer and Rick Ayala (collectively, "Defendants"), by and through their respective attorneys, that Plaintiff may have additional time within which to respond to Washoe County's
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' RENEWED RULE 12 MOTIONS (ECF Nos. 136, 137, and 138 MIRANDA M. DU , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Pedro Rosales-Martinez ("Plaintiff"), and Defendants Washoe County, Heidi Poe, City of Reno, Colby Palmer and Rick Ayala (collectively, "Defendants"), by and through their respective attorneys, that Plaintiff may have additional time within which to respond to Washoe County's R..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' RENEWED RULE 12 MOTIONS (ECF Nos. 136, 137, and 138
MIRANDA M. DU, District Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff Pedro Rosales-Martinez ("Plaintiff"), and Defendants Washoe County, Heidi Poe, City of Reno, Colby Palmer and Rick Ayala (collectively, "Defendants"), by and through their respective attorneys, that Plaintiff may have additional time within which to respond to Washoe County's Renewed Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 136], Defendant Heidi Poe's (Second) Renewed Motion for More Definite Statement [ECF 137], and Defendants City of Reno, Colby Palmer and Rick Ayala's Renewed Motion to Dismiss [ECF 138] each filed on December 21, 2017 (collectively, the "Defendants' Renewed Rule 12 Motions"). Pursuant to this Stipulation, Plaintiff shall have until February 4, 2018 in which to file a Response/Opposition to the Defendants' Rule 12 Motions, and Defendants shall each have until February 22, 2018 to file any reply thereto.
Good cause exists for this extension as Plaintiff's counsel has just recently been engaged to represent the Plaintiff regarding the remaining elements of the case and requires time to become knowledgeable about the case and its procedural posture, and to prepare a response.
This stipulation is not filed for any dilatory or improper purpose.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
