Johnson v. Whirlpool Corporation, 2:15-cv-02425-JCM-CWH. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20190530e41
Visitors: 8
Filed: May 29, 2019
Latest Update: May 29, 2019
Summary: [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE 1 THROUGH 3 [THIRD REQUEST] JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . Defendant WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION ("Defendant") by and through its counsel, Littler Mendelson, and Plaintiff ROBERT JOHNSON (hereinafter "Plaintiff"), by and through his counsel, Paul Padda Law, hereby agree and stipulate to extend the time for Defendant to file a response to Plaintiff's Motions in Limine 1 through 3 (EC
Summary: [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE 1 THROUGH 3 [THIRD REQUEST] JAMES C. MAHAN , District Judge . Defendant WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION ("Defendant") by and through its counsel, Littler Mendelson, and Plaintiff ROBERT JOHNSON (hereinafter "Plaintiff"), by and through his counsel, Paul Padda Law, hereby agree and stipulate to extend the time for Defendant to file a response to Plaintiff's Motions in Limine 1 through 3 (ECF..
More
[PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE 1 THROUGH 3
[THIRD REQUEST]
JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.
Defendant WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION ("Defendant") by and through its counsel, Littler Mendelson, and Plaintiff ROBERT JOHNSON (hereinafter "Plaintiff"), by and through his counsel, Paul Padda Law, hereby agree and stipulate to extend the time for Defendant to file a response to Plaintiff's Motions in Limine 1 through 3 (ECF No. 84) from the current deadline of May 28, 2019 up to and including June 18, 2019.
The extension is necessary in order to provide the parties additional time to continue settlement discussions. Moreover, the stipulated extension reflects the fact that the trial is now continued to August 26, 2019. This is the third request for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's Motion.
This request is made in good faith and not for the purpose of delay.
Respectfully submitted, Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Joshua Y. Ang, Esq. /s/ Marcus B. Smith, Esq.
____________________________ _______________________________
PAUL S. PADDA, ESQ. MICHAEL A. WILDER, ESQ.
JOSHUA Y. ANG, ESQ. WENDY MEDURA KRINCEK, ESQ.
PAUL PADDA LAW, PLLC MARCUS B. SMITH, ESQ.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
ROBERT JOHNSON Attorneys for Defendant,
WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION
ORDER.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
