From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MI-94, LLC v. Chemetall U.S., Inc.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Aug 15, 2023
2:23-cv-00647 (D. Nev. Aug. 15, 2023)

Opinion

2:23-cv-00647

08-15-2023

MI-94, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, also known as METALAST INTERNATIONAL LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. CHEMETALL US, INC., a Delaware corporation; BASF CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; QUALICHEM INC., a Virginia corporation; DUBOIS CHEMICALS, INC., a Delaware corporation; MILES CHEMICAL COMPANY, a California corporation; JOHN SCHNEIDER AND ASSOCIATES, INC., a Wisconsin corporation; BROCO PRODUCTS, INC., an Ohio corporation; RONATEC C2C, a California corporation; ELECTROPLATING CONSULTANTS INTERNATIONAL, an Oklahoma corporation; ALBEMARLE CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation; SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS, INC, an Alabama corporation; Dean Meiling, and individual, Madylon Meiling, an individual; DSM Partners, LLC, a Nevada entity; CHEMEON SURFACE TECHNOLOGY, a Nevada entity; and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants.

HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC W. West Allen Nevada Bar. No. 5566 Attorneys for Defendant DuBois Chemicals, Inc EARLY SULLIVAN WRIGHT GIZER & McRAE LLP Jeremy J.F. Gray Scott E. Gizer, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12216 Attorneys for Plaintiff MI-94, LLC, also known as METALAST INTERNATIONAL LLC


HOWARD & HOWARD ATTORNEYS PLLC

W. West Allen Nevada Bar. No. 5566

Attorneys for Defendant DuBois Chemicals, Inc

EARLY SULLIVAN WRIGHT GIZER & McRAE LLP

Jeremy J.F. Gray

Scott E. Gizer, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12216

Attorneys for Plaintiff

MI-94, LLC, also known as METALAST INTERNATIONAL LLC

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT DUBOIS CHEMICALS, INC. TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO AMENDED COMPLAINT

DANIEL J. ALBREGTS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and District of Nevada Local Rule IA 6-1, Plaintiff MI-94, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “MI-94”) and Defendant DuBois Chemical, Inc. (“Defendant” or “DuBois”), through counsel, hereby agree and stipulate, as follows:

1. MI-94 filed their Complaint (the “Complaint”) on April 4, 2023.

2. MI-94 served the Summons and Complaint on DuBois on June 14, 2023.

3. MI-94 filed their Amended Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) on July 24, 2023.

4. Pursuant to Rule 15(a)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant's response to the Amended Complaint must be made within the time remaining to respond to the original Complaint or within 14 days after service of the amended pleading, whichever is later. Defendant and Plaintiff previously have stipulated to an extension for Defendant to answer or otherwise respond to the original Complaint by August 14, which stipulation was granted on July 18, 2023. [ECF No. 55].

5. Defendant and Plaintiff now stipulate to a 30-day extension of time to file and serve an answer or otherwise respond to the new Amended Complaint, until September 13, 2023. Based on the latest discussion between counsel for the undersigned, it is anticipated that a dismissal with prejudice will be filed as to Dubois Chemical, Inc. before this date.

6. This stipulated extension is requested to allow the parties to review and consider the Settlement Agreement previously entered into by DuBois Chemicals, Inc. with David M. Semas and Metalast, Inc. in the prior U.S. District Court District of Nevada related action titled David M. Semas, et al. v. Chemetall US, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-00125-MMD-CBC, on or about March 3, 2020, and the effect this Settlement Agreement now has on the Amended Complaint. DuBois resolved all legal issues with Plaintiffs Semas and Metalast, Inc. in the prior action and those parties are apparently affiliated with Plaintiff MI-94, LLC in this current action. DuBois believes that the current MI-94, LLC claims concern the same or similar legal issues that already have been resolved through the prior Semas litigation and Settlement Agreement. Additional time is requested, therefore, so that the parties might meet and confer regarding this potentially case dispositive issue as to the new Amended Complaint.

7. This is the first stipulation to extend the date for Defendant to answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED:


Summaries of

MI-94, LLC v. Chemetall U.S., Inc.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Aug 15, 2023
2:23-cv-00647 (D. Nev. Aug. 15, 2023)
Case details for

MI-94, LLC v. Chemetall U.S., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MI-94, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, also known as METALAST…

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Aug 15, 2023

Citations

2:23-cv-00647 (D. Nev. Aug. 15, 2023)