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.

Newport Builders, Inc. v. North Bay Construction

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION


October 28, 2009

NEWPORT BUILDERS, INC., A NEVADA CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
NORTH BAY CONSTRUCTION, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Saundra Brown Armstrong United States District Judge

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COUNTERCLAIM [Docket 80] EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO

Plaintiff moves for an extension of time to respond to Defendant's Counterclaim. (Docket 80.) In its motion, Plaintiff states that it did not submit a stipulation on the ground that under Local Rule 6-1(a), "the time to answer or other[wise] respond to a counterclaim cannot be extended by written stipulation." (Docket 80 at 2.) However, Local Rule 6-1(a) merely states that court approval of a stipulation is not required where the extension of time to file an answer will not affect any pending dates. As such, Plaintiff should have attempted to first obtain a stipulation prior to submitting the instant motion. Moreover, both parties should be aware of Paragraph 5 of this Court's Standing Order for Civil Cases which expressly states: "Meet and Confer Requirement; All parties are required to meet and confer before filing any motion with this court, and to certify that they have complied with this requirement." This requirement-which apparently was not followed-is essential to the parties' representation that there is a dispute which requires the Court's resolution. Nonetheless, given the lack of opposition to the instant motion, the Court, in this instance, will consider and grant the requested extension of time. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's motion to extend time to respond to Defendant's Counterclaim is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall have until November 19, 2009 to file its responsive pleading. The parties are directed to familiarize themselves with the Local Rules and the Standing Orders of this Court. The Court will not consider any further motions or requests that do not comply with the Court's Standing Orders.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20091028

© 1992-2009 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.