Opinion
2:21-cv-00639-JCM-BNW
04-01-2022
JULIE HANNA, Plaintiff, v. K-KEL, INC.. a Nevada Corporation; et al, Defendants.
Kathryn Black, Esquire Pro Hac Vice Admission Attorney for Plaintiff Mitchell Bisson, Esquire Attorney for Defendant
Kathryn Black, Esquire Pro Hac Vice Admission Attorney for Plaintiff
Mitchell Bisson, Esquire Attorney for Defendant
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR RESPONSE AND REPLY TO DEFENDANTS MICHAEL YORK MOTIONS TO DISMISS (ECF NO. 59)
[SECOND REQUEST]
Pursuant to Local Rule 6-1, Plaintiff Julie Danou Hanna (“Plaintiff) and Defendant Michael York (“Defendant”), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate to a fourteen (14) day extension of Plaintiff s deadline to file an Opposition to Defendant Michael York's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 59) and Defendants' deadline to file a Reply to Plaintiffs Opposition, as follows:
Old Deadline New Deadline Plaintiffs Opposition Deadline April 7, 2022 April 21, 2022 Defendant's Reply Deadline April 14, 2022 April 28, 2022
Old Deadline
New Deadline
Plaintiff's Opposition Deadline
April 7, 2022
April 21, 2022
Defendant's Reply Deadline
April 14, 2022
April 28, 2022
This is the second request for an extension of these deadlines. The requested extension is sought in good faith and not for purposes of undue delay.
GOOD CAUSE FOR EXTENSION OF DEADLINES
This extension is necessitated by the withdrawal of Plaintiff s counsel Kathryn Black from this matter. As Ms. Black was the lead attorney representing Plaintiff, her departure from Gilbert Employment Law P.C. will result in the reassignment of her case responsibilities, which include preparing Plaintiffs Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant York. A two-week extension would allow Plaintiffs counsel to reassign her responsibilities appropriately and with consideration for the heavy litigation schedule faced by the remainder of Plaintiff s counsel over the next few weeks.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.