From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rustro v. Black

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
May 6, 2013
Case No. CV13-1327 HRL (N.D. Cal. May. 6, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. CV13-1327 HRL

05-06-2013

LINO FRANCISCO MANDUJANO RUSTRO, Plaintiff, v. KYOKO BLACK and KEIKO ORTIZ, Defendants.

Tomas E. Margain, Esq. Huy Tran, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff LINO FRANCISCO MANDUJANO RUSTRO Fenton & Christopher E. Panetta Attorneys for Defendants KYOKO BLACK and KE1KO ORTIZ


CHRISTOPHER E. PANETTA (Bar No. 175127)
FENTON & KELLER
A Professional Corporation
2801 Monterey-Salinas Highway
Post Office Box 791
Monterey, California 93942-0791
Telephone: (831) 373-1241
Facsimile: (831) 373-7219
CPanetta@FentonKeller.com
Attorneys for Defendants
KYOKO BLACK and KEIKO ORTIZ

STIPULATED REQUEST FOR ORDER

EXTENDING TIME TO FILE ANSWER

TO COMPLAINT; AND ORDER

WHEREAS, on March 25, 2013, the plaintiff, LINO FRANCISCO MANDUJANO RUSTRO ("Plaintiff") filed a Complaint for Statutory Violations Under the FLSA, Unpaid Wages, Penalties and Attorneys' Fees ("Complaint") against defendants KYOKO BLACK and KEIKO ORTIZ (collectively "Defendants");

WHEREAS, Defendants were served with a copy of the Complaint on April 19, 2013;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Plaintiff through his attorney of record and Defendants, through Christopher E. Panetta of Fenton and Keller, as follows:

1. That Defendants were served with a copy of the Complaint on April 19, 2013;

2. That Defendants' response to the Complaint is currently due on or about May 9, 2013;

3. That Plaintiff agrees to extend Defendants' lime to file an answer to the Complaint by two (2) weeks to May 23, 2013;

4. That the parties have sought no prior time modifications by Court order in this case;

5. That extending the lime for Defendants to file a response to the Complaint will not affect the schedule for this case;

6. That this stipulation may be executed in counterparts and by facsimile signatures.

By: ___________

Tomas E. Margain, Esq.

Huy Tran, Esq.

Attorneys for Plaintiff

LINO FRANCISCO MANDUJANO

RUSTRO

Fenton & Keller

By: ___________

Christopher E. Panetta

Attorneys for Defendants

KYOKO BLACK and KE1KO ORTIZ

ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________

THE HONORABLE HOWARD R. LLOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Rustro v. Black

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
May 6, 2013
Case No. CV13-1327 HRL (N.D. Cal. May. 6, 2013)
Case details for

Rustro v. Black

Case Details

Full title:LINO FRANCISCO MANDUJANO RUSTRO, Plaintiff, v. KYOKO BLACK and KEIKO…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Date published: May 6, 2013

Citations

Case No. CV13-1327 HRL (N.D. Cal. May. 6, 2013)