Opinion
2:20-cv-00755-RFB-DJA
02-09-2023
JEREMY E. SIGAL, an individual, Plaintiff, v. WENDY REMMERS, an individual, et al. Defendants.
Schwab Law Firm PLLC Evan D. Schwab, Esq Attorneys for Plaintiff Lorin M. Taylor, Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendant Manuel Portillo
Schwab Law Firm PLLC
Evan D. Schwab, Esq Attorneys for Plaintiff
Lorin M. Taylor, Deputy Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendant Manuel Portillo
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE BRIEFING DEADLINES
RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Jeremy E. Sigal (“Plaintiff”), by and through his attorneys Evan D. Schwab, Esq. of Schwab Law Firm PLLC (“SLF”) and Defendant Manuel Portillo, by and through his attorneys of record Lorin M. Taylor of the Office of the Attorney General, hereby file this Stipulation to Continue Briefing Deadlines as follows.
This Stipulation is entered into for the following reasons:
1. Defendant Portillo filed Defendant Manuel Portillo's Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”) on January 20, 2023. Plaintiff's Response to the Motion is presently due on or before February 10, 2023.
2. Plaintiff's Counsel needs to have access to meet and confer with Plaintiff with regard to the issues and any appropriate responses to the Motion, but Plaintiff is presently outside of the jurisdiction and the Country and unable to meaningfully assist for the given moment. Plaintiff's Counsel would extend any similar professional courtesy to Defendant's Counsel in terms of Reply deadline or otherwise.
3. Counsel for the Parties are in agreement that Plaintiff may have up and until February 24, 2023 to file the Response to the Motion.
4. No Trial date has been set in this matter and the instant extension would not cause undue delay, prejudice or otherwise to any of the Parties to this action. No formal hearing date has been set on the Motion.
5. This Stipulation is entered into in good faith.
Stipulation to Continue Briefing Deadlines
Findings of Fact
Based on the Stipulation to Continue Briefing Deadlines filed by Counsel for the Parties, and good cause appearing therefore, the Court finds that:
1. Defendant Portillo filed Defendant Manuel Portillo's Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”) on January 20, 2023. Plaintiff's Response to the Motion is presently due on or before February 10, 2023.
2. Plaintiff's Counsel needs to have access to meet and confer with Plaintiff with regard to the issues and any appropriate responses to the Motion, but Plaintiff is presently outside of the jurisdiction and the Country and unable to meaningfully assist for the given moment. Plaintiff's Counsel would extend any similar professional courtesy to Defendant's Counsel in terms of Reply deadline or otherwise.
3. Counsel for the Parties are in agreement that Plaintiff may have up and until February 24, 2023 to file the Response to the Motion.
4. No Trial date has been set in this matter and the instant extension would not cause undue delay, prejudice or otherwise to any of the Parties to this action. No formal hearing date has been set on the Motion.
5. This Stipulation is entered into in good faith.
[Remainder of Space Intentionally Left Blank]
Conclusions of Law
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) et seq. permits the Court to extend the time for briefing under including, but not limited to, the following circumstances: “with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires...” In the instant matter Counsel have submitted a Stipulation to continue the briefing deadlines and good cause appears.
Order
IT IS SO ORDERED that Plaintiff's Response to Defendant Manuel Portillo's Motion for Summary Judgment (“Motion”) will be due on or before February 24, 2023.