Opinion
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP Amy M. Spicer San Francisco, CA MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP Joseph Duffy Los Angeles, CA Attorneys for Defendant JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
FRANZ LAW Pamela M. Schuur Attorneys for Plaintiff VLADIMIR RIVKIN
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff Vladimir Rivkin ("Plaintiff") and Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("JPMC" and with Plaintiff, the "Parties"), hereby enter into this Stipulation to Extend Time for Defendant to Respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint with reference to the following facts:
RECITALS
A. On or about October 16, 2014, Plaintiff commenced an action in the Superior Court for the County of Nevada entitled Rivkin v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al., Case Number TCU14-5931 (the "State Court Action").
B. On or around October 23, 2014, Plaintiff served the Summons and First Amended Complaint on JPMC.
C. On November 14, 2014, JPMC timely removed the State Court Action to this Court.
D. On November 25, 2014, the Parties entered into a stipulation to extend the time for JPMC to respond to the First Amended Complaint to allow the Plaintiff and co-defendant Fay Servicing LLC to engage in discussions regarding the then pending Trustee's Sale and in view of the possibility of Plaintiff filing a second amended complaint.
E. On January 8, 2015, Plaintiff filed a request for leave to file a second amended complaint. (Docket No. 21.)
F. On January 21, 2015, the Parties entered into a further stipulation to extend the time for JPMC to respond to the First Amended Complaint in view of Plaintiff's pending request for leave to file a second amended complaint. (Docket No. 25.) The Court entered an order approving the Parties' stipulation on January 22, 2015. (Docket No. 26.)
G. On February 18, 2015 and March 25, 2015, the Parties entered into further stipulations to extend the time for JPMC to respond to the First Amended Complaint in view of Plaintiff's pending request for leave to file a second amended complaint and their ongoing settlement discussions. (Docket Nos. 27 & 31.) The Court entered orders approving the Parties' stipulations on February 19, 2015 and March 30, 2015. (Docket Nos. 28 & 32.) JPMC's current deadline to respond to the First Amended Complaint is May 18, 2015.
H. As of May 12, 2015, the Court has not yet ruled on Plaintiff's request for leave to file the second amended complaint.
I. The Parties are engaged in discussions regarding options for resolving the case without further litigation. In view of Plaintiff's pending request for leave to amend the operative complaint and the Parties' on-going discussions, the Parties have agreed to extend the time for JPMC to respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint to and including July 27, 2015.
J. This is the Parties' fifth request for an extension of time to respond to the First Amended Complaint.
IT IS THEREFOR STIPULATED that JPMC shall have to and including July 27, 2015 to respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.