The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. Jeremy Fogel
STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR GRAMERCY ADVISORS LLC TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT UNTIL FEBRUARY 27, 2009; 15 DECLARATION OF MARK A. BYRNE; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON
This Stipulation is entered into by and between Plaintiffs William Meredith, in his capacity as trustee of the Granum 1983 Children's Trust and Robert Granum (collectively, "Plaintiffs") and Defendant Gramercy Advisors LLC ("Gramercy"), specially appearing, through their respective counsel.
WHEREAS, on May 20, 2008, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint against Gramercy and BDO Seidman LLP in the Superior Court of California for the County of Santa Clara;
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2008, Plaintiffs personally served Gramercy with a copy of the Summons and Complaint;
WHEREAS, Gramercy's response to the Complaint would ordinarily be due on or before October 20, 2008;
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs previously agreed to a thirty day (30) day extension until November 19, 2008, for Gramercy to respond to the Complaint, without prejudice to any jurisdictional challenges Gramercy may raise in its response;
WHEREAS, Gramercy filed a notice of removal to this Court on October 17, 27 2008;
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Defendant BDO Seidman LLP ("BDO") have agreed to work together to seek possible resolution of this matter through mediation and have scheduled a mediation to take place on January 7, 2009, with the Hon. Layn Phillips;
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and BDO agreed to extend the time for BDO to respond 9 to the Complaint until February 17, 2009, to avoid incurring unnecessary attorneys fees and costs and in the interest of judicial economy, which the Court approved on October 24, 2008;
WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Gramercy have agreed to extend the deadline for Gramercy to respond to the Complaint until February 27, 2009, in light of the pending mediation, to avoid incurring unnecessary attorneys fees and costs and in the interest of judicial economy.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties as follows:
1. Gramercy shall have up to and including February 27, 2009, to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint.
2. This stipulation will not be considered as Gramercy's submission to the jurisdiction of this Court, as Gramercy may challenge personal jurisdiction.
3. This stipulation shall not be construed as a waiver of Plaintiffs'5 rights to object to the removal of this action to federal court, nor a waiver of Plaintiffs' right to assert that ...