CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Mission Hills Homeowners Association, 2:16-cv-00374-JCM-CWH. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20181025c58
Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 24, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 24, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC ("SFR") and CitiMortgage, Inc. ("Bank") hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 1. Bank filed its Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment on October 9, 2018. ECF No. 69. 2. SFR's Response to Bank's Motion to Reconsider is currently due October 23, 2018. 3. The parties agree to extend SFR's Response deadline t
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC ("SFR") and CitiMortgage, Inc. ("Bank") hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 1. Bank filed its Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment on October 9, 2018. ECF No. 69. 2. SFR's Response to Bank's Motion to Reconsider is currently due October 23, 2018. 3. The parties agree to extend SFR's Response deadline to..
More
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.
SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC ("SFR") and CitiMortgage, Inc. ("Bank") hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
1. Bank filed its Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment on October 9, 2018. ECF No. 69.
2. SFR's Response to Bank's Motion to Reconsider is currently due October 23, 2018.
3. The parties agree to extend SFR's Response deadline to October 31, 2018.
The request is made to allow SFR sufficient time to adequately prepare the Response. This is SFR's first request for an extension of this deadline and is not made to cause delay or prejudice any party.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
