Wilmington Trust Company v. Malavar-Jaimez, 2:17-cv-02537-JAD-VCF (6). (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20180220i72
Visitors: 8
Filed: Feb. 16, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 16, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FILE RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6) ECF No. 23 JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Plaintiff Wilmington Trust Company, as Successor to U.S. Bank National Association as Trustee for Mastr Alternative Loan Trust 2004-8 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-8 (" Wilmington ") and Defendant SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC (" SFR "), by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate and
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FILE RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6) ECF No. 23 JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Plaintiff Wilmington Trust Company, as Successor to U.S. Bank National Association as Trustee for Mastr Alternative Loan Trust 2004-8 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-8 (" Wilmington ") and Defendant SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC (" SFR "), by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate and ..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FILE RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6)
ECF No. 23
JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff Wilmington Trust Company, as Successor to U.S. Bank National Association as Trustee for Mastr Alternative Loan Trust 2004-8 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-8 ("Wilmington") and Defendant SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC ("SFR"), by and through their respective counsel of record, stipulate and agree that Wilmington shall have up to, and including, March 15, 2018 to file a response to SFR's "Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint [ECF No. 1] Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6)." [ECF No. 19].
The current deadline for Wilmington to file its Response is February 20, 2018. The reason for the extension of time is that Wilmington's counsel is traveling out of the jurisdiction over the President's Day weekend and will be unable to finalize the brief and have it reviewed by his client prior to the due date. Furthermore, Wilmington's counsel has requested the extension because he has multiple briefs due in state and federal courts over the next few weeks, and SFR's counsel graciously agreed to provide the above-referenced extension to accommodate. The extension is sought in good faith and not for the purpose of undue delay or to prejudice any party.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDRERED.
Source: Leagle
