Filed: Aug. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 01, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR TO FILE REPLIES [FIRST REQUEST] JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Plaintiff The Bank of New York Mellon fka The Bank of New York as Trustee for the Certificateholders CWMBS, Inc., CHL Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2005-HYB4, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-HYB4 ( BoNYM ), and Defendant SFR Investment Pool 1, LLC ( SFR ) stipulate as follows: 1. BoNYM filed its motion to for summary judgment on June 26, 2018. [ECF No. 47]. SFR file
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR TO FILE REPLIES [FIRST REQUEST] JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Plaintiff The Bank of New York Mellon fka The Bank of New York as Trustee for the Certificateholders CWMBS, Inc., CHL Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2005-HYB4, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-HYB4 ( BoNYM ), and Defendant SFR Investment Pool 1, LLC ( SFR ) stipulate as follows: 1. BoNYM filed its motion to for summary judgment on June 26, 2018. [ECF No. 47]. SFR filed..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR TO FILE REPLIES
[FIRST REQUEST]
JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff The Bank of New York Mellon fka The Bank of New York as Trustee for the Certificateholders CWMBS, Inc., CHL Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2005-HYB4, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-HYB4 (BoNYM), and Defendant SFR Investment Pool 1, LLC (SFR) stipulate as follows:
1. BoNYM filed its motion to for summary judgment on June 26, 2018. [ECF No. 47]. SFR filed its response on July 17, 2018 [ECF No. 55]. BoNYM's reply is currently due on July 31, 2018.
2. SFR filed its motion to for summary judgment on June 29, 2018. [ECF No. 53]. BoNYM filed its response on July 20, 2018 [ECF No. 58] SFR's reply is currently due on August 3, 2018.
3. The parties hereby stipulate and agree that both SFR and BoNYM shall have until August 14, 2018 to file their replies in support of their respective summary judgement motions.
The extension is requested because counsel for BoNYM was engaged in trial preparation and trial for the bulk of the last two weeks. Additionally, both counsel have briefing deadlines in several different cases all falling on the same dates. The requested extension is to allow both counsel an opportunity to adequately and thoroughly respond to the arguments raised in the opposing briefs. This is the first request for an extension of this deadline and is not made for purposes of undue delay.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.