From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Paysign, Inc.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Jul 27, 2023
2:23-cv-00713-RFB-NJK (D. Nev. Jul. 27, 2023)

Opinion

2:23-cv-00713-RFB-NJK

07-27-2023

ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff v. PAYSIGN, INC., MARK R. NEWCOMER, MARK ATTINGER, DANIEL R. HENRY, JOAN M. HERMAN, BRUCE A. MINA, DANIEL H. SPENCE, DENNIS TRIPLETT, and QUINN WILLIAMS, Defendants

Jeffrey D. Olster LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff Argonaut Insurance Company LEMONS, GRUNDY & EISENBERG, PC Christian L. Moore, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants PAYSIGN, INC., MARK R. NEWCOMER, MARK ATTINGER, DANIEL R. HENRY, JOAN M. HERMAN, BRUCE A. MINA, DANIEL H. SPENCE, DENNIS TRIPLETT and QUINN WILLIAMS


Jeffrey D. Olster

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiff Argonaut Insurance Company

LEMONS, GRUNDY & EISENBERG, PC

Christian L. Moore, Esq.

Attorneys for Defendants PAYSIGN, INC., MARK R. NEWCOMER, MARK ATTINGER, DANIEL R. HENRY, JOAN M. HERMAN, BRUCE A. MINA, DANIEL H. SPENCE, DENNIS TRIPLETT and QUINN WILLIAMS

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

(SECOND REQUEST)

Pursuant to LR IA 6-1 and LR 7-1, the parties, through their respective counsel, stipulate to extend the time for Defendants to file their response to Plaintiff's Complaint for Declaratory Relief (ECF No. 1). The parties submit that good cause exists for this stipulation based on the following:

1. Plaintiff filed its Complaint on May 5, 2023 (ECF No. 1).

2. The Complaint was served on defendant Paysign, Inc. on or about June 7, 2023.

3. Subsequent to this initial service, attorney Brian G. Friel, who represents Paysign, Inc., advised that his office will be among the attorneys representing all Defendants, and agreed to accept service of the Complaint on behalf of all remaining unserved Defendants.

4. As part of this procedural cooperation between the parties, the parties initially agreed that all Defendants will have until July 28, 2023 to respond to the Complaint, and the parties submitted a stipulation to this effect (ECF No. 17).

5. The parties continue to discuss the merits of the issues raised in the Complaint in an attempt to avoid the time and expense of further litigation. To facilitate these ongoing discussions, the parties agree that an additional 30-day extension for Defendants to respond to the Complaint will be mutually beneficial.

6. The parties therefore agree and respectfully submit that good cause exists for an additional 30-day extension, or to August 28, 2023, for Defendants to respond to the Complaint.

7. This stipulation constitutes the parties' second requested extension of time.

IT IS SO ORDERED:


Summaries of

Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Paysign, Inc.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Jul 27, 2023
2:23-cv-00713-RFB-NJK (D. Nev. Jul. 27, 2023)
Case details for

Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Paysign, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ARGONAUT INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff v. PAYSIGN, INC., MARK R. NEWCOMER…

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Jul 27, 2023

Citations

2:23-cv-00713-RFB-NJK (D. Nev. Jul. 27, 2023)