Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00718/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00718-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Comcast of California III, Inc.
Plaintiff
Jacques Tardif
Defendant
Stephane Tardif
Defendant

Document Text:

Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for a Fourteen (14) Day Extension of Time to Respond to the Court’s “Order Re Further Briefing in 

Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Docket Nos. 15, 17)” – Docket No. 28 

1

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

Jeffrey R. Platt, ARDC No. 06208148

Maureen A. Beck, ARDC No. 06274541

Coman & Anderson, P.C. 

2525 Cabot Drive, Suite 300 

Lisle, IL 60532 

Telephone: (630) 428-2660 

Fax: (630) 428-2549 

Admitted Pro Hac Vice 

Joshua G. Genser - CA State Bar #111526 

Genser & Watkins 

125 Park Place, Suite 210 

Point Richmond, CA 94801 

Telephone: (510) 237-6916 

Fax: (510) 236-9851 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Comcast of

California III, Inc., a California corporation 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Comcast of California III, Inc., a California 

corporation,

Plaintiff,

 v. 

Stephane Tardif, individually and Jacques 

Tardif, individually

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 005-00718EMC 

Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for 

a Fourteen (14) Day Extension of 

Time to Respond to the Court’s 

“Order Re Further Briefing in 

Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for 

Default Judgment (Docket Nos. 15, 

17)” – Docket No. 28 

Magistrate Judge Edward M. Chen

This matter coming to be heard on Plaintiff’s Motion for a Fourteen (14) Day

Extension of Time to Respond to the Court’s “Order Re Further Briefing in Support of

Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Docket Nos. 15, 17),” the Court being fully

Case 3:05-cv-00718-CRB Document 31 Filed 10/13/05 Page 1 of 2
Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for a Fourteen (14) Day Extension of Time to Respond to the Court’s “Order Re Further Briefing in 

Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Docket Nos. 15, 17)” – Docket No. 28 

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

advised in the premises, due notice having been given, and no one appearing on behalf 

of the Defendant: 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED. The Plaintiff 

shall have up to and including October 26, 2005 to file a response to the Court’s “Order 

Re Further Briefing in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Docket Nos. 

15, 17).” 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated:

EDWARD M. CHEN 

United States Magistrate Judge 

October 13, 2005

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:05-cv-00718-CRB Document 31 Filed 10/13/05 Page 2 of 2