From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lobato v. Khahra

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Oct 22, 2015
1:15-cv-01238-JLT (E.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2015)

Opinion

          KEITH M. WHITE, COLEMAN & HOROWITT, LLP, Attorney at Law, Fresno, California, Attorneys for Defendants, DILJEET S. KHAHRA, individually and dba HWY 46 QUICK STOP; MOHINDER KAUR KHAHRA, individually and dba HWY 46 QUICK STOP.

          TANYA E. MOORE, MOORE LAW FIRM, P.C., San Jose, CA., Attorneys for Plaintiff, RACHEL LOBATO.


          SECOND STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS' DILJEET S. KHAHRA, INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HWY 46 QUICK STOP; MOHINDER KAUR KHAHRA, INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HWY 46 QUICK STOP, DEADLINE TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT; [PROPOSED] ORDER

          JENNIFER L. THURSTON, District Judge.

         Plaintiff, RACHEL LOBATO ("Plaintiff") and Defendants, DILJEET S. KHAHRA, individually and dba HWY 46 QUICK STOP ("Diljeet"), and MOHINDER KAUR KHAHRA, individually and dba HWY 46 QUICK STOP ("Mohinder"), (Diljeet and Mohinder are collectively "Defendants"), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

         WHEREAS, the responsive pleading of Defendants is due on October 6, 2015;

         WHEREAS, there has already been one stipulation for a 28-day extension of time to respond;

         WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants wish additional time to attempt resolution of the matter without incurring fees and costs associated with filing responsive pleadings;

         WHEREAS, a further extension of time is necessary in order to complete the terms of the settlement between the parties and it is likely that the case will settle without further use of the Court's resources and time;

         WHEREAS, the extension granted in this Stipulation will not affect or change any of the currently scheduled Court dates in this case.

         NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff, through her attorney of record, and Defendants, through their attorney of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

         1. That Defendants' time to respond to the Complaint is extended to November 9, 2015, which extension exceeds 28 days from the initial deadline.

          ORDER

         The parties having so stipulated and good cause appearing, it is hereby ordered that Defendants shall have to and including November 9, 2015 within which to file a responsive pleading.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lobato v. Khahra

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Oct 22, 2015
1:15-cv-01238-JLT (E.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2015)
Case details for

Lobato v. Khahra

Case Details

Full title:RACHEL LOBATO, Plaintiff, v. DILJEET S. KHAHRA, individually and dba HWY…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Oct 22, 2015

Citations

1:15-cv-01238-JLT (E.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2015)