Tile Tech Inc v Appian Way Sales Inc, 2:17-cv-01660-JLR. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20171206922
Visitors: 4
Filed: Nov. 21, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 21, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO ANSWER COMPLAINT JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff Tile Tech, Inc. filed its Complaint on November 3, 2017 (Dkt. 1). James E. Doroshow, counsel for Defendants Appian Way Sales, Inc. and Puget Lite-Pavers, Inc. ("Defendants"), accepted service on Defendants' behalf on November 10, 2017. (Dkt. 8). In order to provide Defendants with additional time to answer or otherwise move the Court for relief, and
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO ANSWER COMPLAINT JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff Tile Tech, Inc. filed its Complaint on November 3, 2017 (Dkt. 1). James E. Doroshow, counsel for Defendants Appian Way Sales, Inc. and Puget Lite-Pavers, Inc. ("Defendants"), accepted service on Defendants' behalf on November 10, 2017. (Dkt. 8). In order to provide Defendants with additional time to answer or otherwise move the Court for relief, and s..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO ANSWER COMPLAINT
JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.
STIPULATION
Plaintiff Tile Tech, Inc. filed its Complaint on November 3, 2017 (Dkt. 1). James E. Doroshow, counsel for Defendants Appian Way Sales, Inc. and Puget Lite-Pavers, Inc. ("Defendants"), accepted service on Defendants' behalf on November 10, 2017. (Dkt. 8). In order to provide Defendants with additional time to answer or otherwise move the Court for relief, and subject to this Court's approval, the parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree to the following extension of time:
From To
Defendants' deadline to answer, or December 1, 2017 December 7, 2017
otherwise move the Court for relief, on or
before:
[PROPOSED] ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
