Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Bliss v. CoreCivic, Inc., 2:18-cv-01280-JAD-GWF. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20181108l45 Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 05, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 05, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT ECF No. 34 JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Plaintiff, Kathleen Bliss ("Plaintiff"), and Defendant, CoreCivic, Inc. ("CoreCivic"), through counsel, stipulate pursuant to LR IA 6-1 and LR 7-1 to extend the time for CoreCivic to submit its Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint ("Reply"). CoreCivic filed its Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint on October 12, 2018. (Doc. 26.) Plain
More

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT

ECF No. 34

Plaintiff, Kathleen Bliss ("Plaintiff"), and Defendant, CoreCivic, Inc. ("CoreCivic"), through counsel, stipulate pursuant to LR IA 6-1 and LR 7-1 to extend the time for CoreCivic to submit its Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint ("Reply"). CoreCivic filed its Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint on October 12, 2018. (Doc. 26.) Plaintiff filed her Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint on October 26, 2018. (Doc. 29.) Pursuant to LR 7-2(b), CoreCivic's Reply is currently due on or before November 2, 2018. The parties stipulate and agree that CoreCivic may have up to and including November 12, 2018 to file its Reply. The additional time is necessary due to deadlines in other matters counsel for CoreCivic is handling. This is the first stipulation for extension of time to file the Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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