Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Ditech Financial LLC v. SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC, 2:16-cv-00127-GMN-NJK. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180109b11 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 08, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 08, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO RENEWED MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF THE CWABS, INC. ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES SERIES 2005-17, IN PLACE OF DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC [ECF NO. 136] FIRST REQUEST) NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Defendant/Counterclaimant/Cross-Claimant, SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC ("SFR"), Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, Ditech Financial, LLC ("Ditech"), Cross-Defendant, Bank of New York Mell
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO RENEWED MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF THE CWABS, INC. ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES SERIES 2005-17, IN PLACE OF DITECH FINANCIAL, LLC [ECF NO. 136]

FIRST REQUEST)

Defendant/Counterclaimant/Cross-Claimant, SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC ("SFR"), Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, Ditech Financial, LLC ("Ditech"), Cross-Defendant, Bank of New York Mellon, FKA The Bank of New York as Trustee for the Certificateholders CWABS, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2005-J12 Asset-Backed Certificates Series 2005-17 ("BNYM"), Defendant Boulder Ranch Master Association ("Boulder Ranch"), Defendant Twilight Homeowners Association ("Twilight") by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree to allow defendants a one week extension to file any response to the Renewed Motion to Substitute BNYM in place of Ditech [ECF No. 136] which was filed on Thursday, December 21, 2017 from the original deadline of Thursday, January 4, 2018 to Thursday, January 11, 2018. SFR requested the extension due to the holidays and sickness of SFR's counsel.

This is the first request for an extension of this deadline. This request for an extension is made by the parties' in good faith and is not meant for purposes of delay or prejudice to any party.

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