Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Gaia Botanicals, LLC v. Pacific Payment Technologies, LLC, 2:18-cv-00789-APG-PAL. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20181003h09 Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 02, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 02, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS PACIFIC PAYMENT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC d/b/a, UBIQUITY, TRE'LAGE, LLC, NEIL HABOUSH, NEIL SOLLINGER, MARK SOLLER, PASHA SOLLINGER AND NANCY E. LABIER TO FILE THEIR REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS [ECF NO. 32] (SECOND REQUEST) ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . Plaintiff, Gaia Botanicals, LLC ("Plaintiff"), and Defendants Pacific Payment Technologies d/b/a Ubiquity, Tre'lage, LLC, Neil Haboush, Neil Sollinger, Mark Soller, Pasha Sollinger a
More

STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DEFENDANTS PACIFIC PAYMENT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC d/b/a, UBIQUITY, TRE'LAGE, LLC, NEIL HABOUSH, NEIL SOLLINGER, MARK SOLLER, PASHA SOLLINGER AND NANCY E. LABIER TO FILE THEIR REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS [ECF NO. 32]

(SECOND REQUEST)

Plaintiff, Gaia Botanicals, LLC ("Plaintiff"), and Defendants Pacific Payment Technologies d/b/a Ubiquity, Tre'lage, LLC, Neil Haboush, Neil Sollinger, Mark Soller, Pasha Sollinger and Nancy LaBier ("Stipulating Defendants"), by and through their respective counsel, file this Stipulation for Extension of Time for Stipulating Defendants to file their reply in support of their pending Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 32). Stipulating Defendants request an extension up to and including October 12, 2018 to file their reply in support of the pending Motion to Dismiss.1

This stipulation is made in good faith and will not prejudice any party. This stipulation is requested due to a personal family emergency of lead counsel for Stipulating Defendants, necessitating his travel out of state.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED that Defendants Pacific Payment Technologies d/b/a Ubiquity, Tre'lage, LLC, Neil Haboush, Neil Sollinger, Mark Soller, Pasha Sollinger and Nancy LaBier have up to and including October 12, 2018 to file their reply in support of the Motion to Dismiss.

FootNotes


1. This is the second request for an extension as the stipulation entered on August 28, 2018, provided Stipulating Defendants with two weeks to file their reply from the date of Plaintiff's opposition. (ECF No. 36).
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