Filed: Sep. 28, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 28, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND REPLY AND RESPONSE DEADLINES (FIRST REWUEST) GLORIA M. NAVARRO , Chief District Judge . SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC ("SFR"), FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY ("FHFA"), FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION ("Fannie Mae") and FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION's ("Freddie Mac") stipulate as follows: 1. SFR filed its Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 60] on August 22, 2018. 2. Plaintiffs' response to SFR's Motion to Dismiss was originally due on September 5, 2018. By stipul
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND REPLY AND RESPONSE DEADLINES (FIRST REWUEST) GLORIA M. NAVARRO , Chief District Judge . SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC ("SFR"), FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY ("FHFA"), FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION ("Fannie Mae") and FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION's ("Freddie Mac") stipulate as follows: 1. SFR filed its Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 60] on August 22, 2018. 2. Plaintiffs' response to SFR's Motion to Dismiss was originally due on September 5, 2018. By stipula..
More
STIPULATION TO EXTEND REPLY AND RESPONSE DEADLINES (FIRST REWUEST)
GLORIA M. NAVARRO, Chief District Judge.
SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC ("SFR"), FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY ("FHFA"), FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION ("Fannie Mae") and FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION's ("Freddie Mac") stipulate as follows:
1. SFR filed its Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 60] on August 22, 2018.
2. Plaintiffs' response to SFR's Motion to Dismiss was originally due on September 5, 2018. By stipulation of the parties [ECF No. 64], entered on August 30, 2018, the Plaintiffs' deadline to respond to SFR's Motion to Dismiss was continued to September 19, 2018.
3. Plaintiffs filed their Response to SFR's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 65] on September 19, 2018.
4. SFR's Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss is currently due September 26, 2018.
5. Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 66] on September 19, 2018.
6. SFR's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is currently due October 10, 2018.
7. Plaintiffs filed their Motion to Stay Discovery, or in the alternative, Motion for Protective Order [ECF No. 70 and 71] on September 21, 2018.
8. SFR's Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Stay Discovery, or in the alternative, Motion for Protective Order is currently due October 5, 2018.
9. The parties are engaging in settlement discussions and wish to further explore that option prior to expending potentially unnecessary additional resources toward the above referenced Motions.
10. As such, the parties stipulate that SFR's Reply in Support of its Motion to Dismiss, Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment, and Response to Plaintiffs' Motion to Stay Discovery, or in the alternative, Motion for Protective Order shall be due on or before October 17, 2018.
This is SFR's first request for the extension of these deadlines and it is not made to cause delay or prejudice to any party. This extension will allow the parties additional time to explore settlement and allow SFR sufficient time to respond accordingly, if necessary.
IT IS ORDERED.
