From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Castronovo-Flihan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Oct 28, 2022
2:20-cv-1197-JCM-DJA (D. Nev. Oct. 28, 2022)

Opinion

2:20-cv-1197-JCM-DJA

10-28-2022

GINA CASTRONOVO-FLIHAN, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a foreign company; AND DOES I through V, inclusive Defendants.

MCMENEMY | INJURY LAW PLLC IAN M. MCMENEMY, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF GINA CASTRONOVOFLIHAN LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP ROBERT W. FREEMAN CHERYL A. GRAMES ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY


MCMENEMY | INJURY LAW PLLC IAN M. MCMENEMY, ESQ. ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF GINA CASTRONOVOFLIHAN

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP ROBERT W. FREEMAN CHERYL A. GRAMES ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT TO FILE REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE (ECF No. 45) TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 40)

(SECOND REQUEST)

Plaintiff Gina Castronovo-Flihan (“Plaintiff”), by and through her undersigned counsel of record, and Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Defendant”), by and through its undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate and agree, subject to the Court's approval, as follows:

1. On September 15, 2022, Defendant filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Pursuant to FRCP 56(d) (ECF No. 40);

2. By stipulation and order, the deadline for Plaintiff's Response was extended from October 6, 2022 to October 17, 2022 and the deadline for Defendant's Reply in support of its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment was extended to October 31, 2022 (ECF No. 45).

3. Plaintiff timely filed her Response (ECF No. 46) on October 17, 2022.

4. Based on the issues at bar in the parties' briefing thus far, Defendant requires additional time to file its reply brief, through and including November 7, 2022.

The parties bring this stipulated request for an extension of the briefing schedule in good faith, they do not interpose it for delay, and they do not file it for an improper purpose. This is the second stipulation for extension of time to file Defendant's Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Pursuant to FRCP 56(d).

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Castronovo-Flihan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Oct 28, 2022
2:20-cv-1197-JCM-DJA (D. Nev. Oct. 28, 2022)
Case details for

Castronovo-Flihan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:GINA CASTRONOVO-FLIHAN, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE…

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Oct 28, 2022

Citations

2:20-cv-1197-JCM-DJA (D. Nev. Oct. 28, 2022)