Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00643/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00643-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 23:1441 Contract Real Estate

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM PERRYMAN, 

Plaintiff,

v.

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., and 

QUALITY LOAN SERVICE 

CORPORATION,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:16-cv-00643-LJO-SKO

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT 

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.’S EX 

PARTE REQUEST FOR INITIAL 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO 

COMPLAINT

On May 13, 2016, after three unsuccessful attempts to secure a stipulation from Plaintiff 

William Perryman (“Plaintiff”), Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Defendant”) filed an 

Ex Parte Request for Initial Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint pursuant to Rule 144(c) 

of the Local Rules of the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. (Docs. 4 and 

4-1.) 

By minute order entered May 16, 2016, the Court ordered Plaintiff to submit any 

opposition, or statement of non-opposition, to Defendant’s ex parte request by the end of the day 

on May 17, 2016. (Doc. 5.) Plaintiff submitted neither, and therefore the request is deemed 

unopposed.

//

//

Case 1:16-cv-00643-LJO-SKO Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Defendant’s ex parte request to extend the time in which to respond to the complaint by 

thirty days to June 16, 2016, is hereby GRANTED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 19, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00643-LJO-SKO Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 2 of 2