Opinion
2:19-cv-00373-APG-EJY
04-05-2022
SANDRA M. MEZA-PEREZ an Individual, Plaintiff, v. SBARRO LLC dba SBARRO PIZZA, a foreign limited liability company, SBARRO INC., dba SBARRO PIZZA a foreign corporation, ZACHARY CEBALLES, an individual, EFRAIN HERNANDEZ, an individual, JESUS ALATORRE, an individual, Defendants.
JENNY L. FOLEY, PH.D., ESQ. HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP HARDEEP SULL, ESQ. SULL & ASSOCIATES, PLLC ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF PATRICK N. CHAPIN, ESQ. PATRICK N. CHAPIN, LTD ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT ZACHARY CEBALLES PATRICK HICKS, ESQ. KELSEY E. STEGALL, ESQ. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. JASON K. HICKS, ESQ. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS SBARRO, LLC DBA SBARRO PIZZA, SBARRO, INC. DBA SBARRO PIZZA
JENNY L. FOLEY, PH.D., ESQ. HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP HARDEEP SULL, ESQ. SULL & ASSOCIATES, PLLC ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
PATRICK N. CHAPIN, ESQ. PATRICK N. CHAPIN, LTD ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT ZACHARY CEBALLES
PATRICK HICKS, ESQ. KELSEY E. STEGALL, ESQ. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. JASON K. HICKS, ESQ. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS SBARRO, LLC DBA SBARRO PIZZA, SBARRO, INC. DBA SBARRO PIZZA
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO FILE RESPONSES TO MOTIONS IN LIMINE
(SECOND REQUEST)
Plaintiff, SANDRA M. MEZA-PEREZ (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants SBARRO LLC dba SBARRO PIZZA, a foreign limited liability company, SBARRO INC., dba SBARRO PIZZA a foreign corporation, and Defendant Zachary Ceballes, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate to extend the deadline to file responses to the Motions in Limine (ECF 246, 247, 250).
Responses to the Motions in Limine (ECF 246, 247, 250) are currently due on April 4, 2022 (ECF 274). While Defendants are prepared to timely file their opposition to the Plaintiff's Motions in Limine as a matter of professional courtesy, Defendants are in agreement to a mutual extension of time.
The parties have agreed to extend this date to April 11, 2022.
The parties require this extension to give newly appearing counsel for Plaintiff time to obtain the complete file and review the same and respond to the Motions in Limine. As such, the parties stipulate for the extension to finalize and provide the Oppositions to the Court.
Accordingly, this extension is made in good faith and not for the purpose of undue delay. This is especially true given the Court's recent rescheduling of trial from the March 28 trial stack to the August 22 trial stack, providing the parties and the Court enough time to seek this extension and decide these Motions prior to trial. The parties agree that no further extensions will be requested regarding these Motions in Limine.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.