Opinion
2:22-cv-02065-GMN-EJY
01-03-2023
BRODERICK SINCLAIR, individually, Plaintiff, v. OTIS WORLDWIDE CORPORATION, OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY, ROBERT LINDLEY, STEVE BERGER, ZACHARY CHRISTIANSEN, STEVEN SPERB, KEVIN HANSON, JANE NGUYEN, AND PAUL HENTZ; DOES I through X; and ROE CORPORATIONS I through X, inclusive, Defendants.
PAUL MATA Nevada Bar No. 14922 SEYFARTH SHAW, LLP Attorneys for Defendant Otis Elevator Company
PAUL MATA Nevada Bar No. 14922 SEYFARTH SHAW, LLP Attorneys for Defendant Otis Elevator Company
DEFENDANT OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY'S UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE PLEAD
(FIRST REQUEST)
HON. ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Defendant OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY (“Otis”), by and through its attorneys, and pursuant to LR IA 6-1, respectfully moves this Court to extend the deadline for Otis to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's complaint until February 17, 2023. In support of this motion, Prudential states as follows:
1. Plaintiff filed his Complaint in the District of Nevada on December 13, 2022.
2. Otis was served on December 15, 2022, and Otis' response is currently due on January 5, 2023.
3. Otis and its counsel require additional time in which to investigate the claims and prepare Otis's response to the Complaint.
4. Otis's counsel contacted opposing counsel on December 21, 2022 to request an extension of time for Otis to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. Plaintiff does not object to this extension.
5. This is Otis's first request for an extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's complaint.
6. This request is made in good faith and not for the purposes of unwarranted delay or for any other improper purpose.
WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Otis respectfully requests that the Court enter an order granting Otis an extension of time until February 17, 2023, in which to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.