Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pacific Information Resources, Inc. v. Musselman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 3, 2008

PACIFIC INFORMATION RESOURCES, INC., PLAINTIFF,
v.
DIANA MUSSELMAN, INDIVIDUALLY, ET. AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Maxine M. Chesney United States District Judge

[Before the Honorable Maxine M. Chesney]

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S PACIFIC INFORMATION RESOURCES, INC.'S APPLICATION FOR RETROACTIVE LEAVE TO FILE ONE DAY LATE MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS AIRON CORPORATION, LEVON GASPARIAN, AND ALEXEI BORISOV'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/ ADJUDICATION

[Filed Concurrently With: Application for Retroactive Leave to File Late Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Airon Defendants Motion for Summary Adjudication; and Declaration Of Konrad L. Trope] 4th Am. Com. Filed: March 23, 2007 Expert Discovery Cut-Off: February 26, 2008 Trial: TBA Status Conference: TBA MSJ Hearing Date: April 25, 2008 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept.: 7

Plaintiff Pacific Information Resources ("Pacific") has presented an Application for Retroactive Leave to File One Day Late Its Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendants Airon Corporation, Alexi Borisov and Levon Gasparian (Airon Defendants) Motion for Summary Judgment/Adjudication.

No opposition or response was filed.

The Court having considered the papers presented finds that:

1. Plaintiff Pacific's one day late service was with good cause (without bad faith) owing to counsel for Pacific having to:

A. Respond to Airon's 47 page initial Memorandum of Points and Authorities; plus

B. Respond to Airon's 48 page Supplemental Declaration filed only 7 days ago; and

C. Respond to Airon challenging most, if not all of Plaintiff's 42 claims for relief.

2. Plaintiff had underestimated the time necessary to address all of the issues raised by Airon's Motion when Pacific requested, and received by prior Court Order, two additional court days to complete its opposition.

3. Thus, the late serving was harmless as there was no demonstrable prejudice to

Defendants or their counsel.

Therefore, Plaintiff Pacific's request is HEREBY GRANTED.

20080403

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.