Opinion
2:22-cv-2028-CDS-DJA
12-14-2022
RICARDO O. BARAHONA-GONZALEZ, an individual, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY; DOES 1 through 10 inclusive, and ROE ENTITIES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants.
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH Jennifer A. Taylor ROBERT W. FREEMAN Nevada Bar No. 3062 JENNIFER A. TAYLOR, Nevada Bar No. 6141 Attorneys for Defendant RALPH A. SCHWARTZ, P.C. Ralph A. Schwartz RALPH A. SCHWARTZ Nevada Bar No. 5488 Attorneys for Plaintiff Ricardo O. Barahona-Gonzalez
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH
Jennifer A. Taylor
ROBERT W. FREEMAN
Nevada Bar No. 3062
JENNIFER A. TAYLOR,
Nevada Bar No. 6141
Attorneys for Defendant
RALPH A. SCHWARTZ, P.C.
Ralph A. Schwartz
RALPH A. SCHWARTZ
Nevada Bar No. 5488
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Ricardo O. Barahona-Gonzalez
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT
DANIEL J. ALBREGTS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
COMES NOW DEFENDANT STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (“State Farm” or “Defendant”), by and through its counsel of record, the law firm of LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP, and PLAINTIFF, RICARDO O. BARAHONA-GONZALEZ, by and through his counsel of record, RALPH A. SCHWARTZ, P.C., hereby stipulate and agree that the time for Defendant to file its Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint be extended as set forth herein. Defendant State Farm's Answer is currently due December 12, 2022. The parties hereby stipulate that the due date for Defendant's Answer be extended to January 4, 2023.
Reason for Extension
The parties are active negotiations to resolve this action. In addition because of the complexity and extent of the allegations and claims made in Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant requires additional time to prepare its Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint. This stipulation is made in good faith and not for the purpose of delay.
This is the first extension of time requested for filing Defendant's response to Plaintiff's Complaint.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.