Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Castronova v. Credit One Bank, 2:18-cv-01786-RFB-PAL. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20181213e34 Visitors: 8
Filed: Dec. 12, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 12, 2018
Summary: THIRD STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS [THIRD REQUEST] RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II , District Judge . Plaintiff Monika Castronova ("Plaintiff"), by and through her counsel of record, and Defendant TransUnion LLC ("Trans Union") have agreed and stipulated to the following: 1. On September 14, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Complaint [ECF Dkt. 1]. 2. On October 31, 2018, Trans Union filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [ECF Dkt. 26]. 3. Plaintiff's
More

THIRD STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS [THIRD REQUEST]

Plaintiff Monika Castronova ("Plaintiff"), by and through her counsel of record, and Defendant TransUnion LLC ("Trans Union") have agreed and stipulated to the following:

1. On September 14, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Complaint [ECF Dkt. 1].

2. On October 31, 2018, Trans Union filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [ECF Dkt. 26].

3. Plaintiff's Response was originally due on November 14, 2018.

4. The Court granted Plaintiff and Trans Union's first stipulation to extend time for Plaintiff's Response to November 28, 2018 [ECF Dkt. 36].

5. Plaintiff and Trans Union then requested another fourteen-day extension due to continued settlement discussions on November 27, 2018 [ECF Dkt. 39]. The Court granted Plaintiff and Trans Union's second stipulation to extend time for Plaintiff's Response to December 12, 2018 [ECF Dkt. 41].

6. Plaintiff has been diligently trying to procure a current copy of her Trans Union consumer disclosure. On November 9, 2018, she was told by Trans Union that her report would be mailed in 6-8 days. As of December 10, 2018, she still had not received her report, so she called Trans Union again to follow up. Although she spoke with several representatives on the phone, none were able to give her a time frame by which to expect her report. However, Plaintiff and Trans Union believe an additional fourteen days should be sufficient to obtain this disclosure. This disclosure is highly relevant to Plaintiff's amended complaint, and as such, Plaintiff requires more time to obtain it. As a result, both Plaintiff and Trans Union hereby request this Court to further extend the date for Plaintiff to respond to Trans Union's Motion to Dismiss Complaint until December 26, 2018. This stipulation is made in good faith, is not interposed for delay, and is not filed for an improper purpose.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO DISMISS

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