Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01101/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01101-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Camp Richardson Resort, Inc.
Plaintiff
Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company
Defendant

Document Text:

1

FIRST STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; ORDER

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

JAMES C. NIELSEN (111889)

 jnielsen@nielsenhaley.com

DANIEL N. KATIBAH (293251)

 dkatibah@nielsenhaley.com

NIELSEN, HALEY & ABBOTT LLP

100 Smith Ranch Road, Suite 350

San Rafael, California 94903

Telephone: (415) 693-0900

Facsimile: (415) 693-9674

Attorneys for Defendant,

PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CAMP RICHARDSON RESORT, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY 

INSURANCE COMPANY; 

Defendant.

Civil Action No.: 2:15-CV-01101-TLNAC

FIRST STIPULATION TO EXTEND 

TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST 

AMENDED COMPLAINT; ORDER

(L.R. 144)

HONORABLE 

TROY L. NUNLEY

TO THE CLERK OF THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT:

Under Eastern District Local Rule 144(a) (Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., rule 6), the parties 

hereby stipulate that Defendant Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company may have up to 

and including February 17, 2016 to file an answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff Camp 

Richardson Resort, Inc.’s First Amended Complaint. This is the third such overall 

extension of time in this case, but the first such extension in connection with Camp 

Case 2:15-cv-01101-TLN-AC Document 20 Filed 01/27/16 Page 1 of 2
2

FIRST STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; ORDER

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

Richardson’s First Amended Complaint.

Philadelphia seeks this extension because it intends to file a Motion to Dismiss 

under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The additional two weeks is 

justified because the legal arguments in Philadelphia’s motion and inherent in this dispute 

are at once delicate and complex and will take more time to appropriately craft than the 

standard 21 days. Additionally, Philadelphia’s two defense attorneys working on this 

matter have been, and in the immediate term will continue to be, unable to devote sufficient 

time to this matter as they are engaged with two pre-existing appellate matters which carry 

with them deadlines that cannot be rescheduled and which include travelling to Fresno for 

oral argument. Collectively, these matters have prevented Philadelphia’s attorneys from 

devoting the necessary time to the preparation of their initial motion. Camp Richardson 

does not object to Philadelphia’s request for this extension.

January 26, 2016 BANKS & WATSON

 By: /s/

ROBERTA LINDSEY SCOTT

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CAMP RICHARDSON RESORT, INC.

January 26, 2016 NIELSEN, HALEY & ABBOTT LLP

 By: /s/

DANIEL N. KATIBAH

Attorneys for Defendant

PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY

In accordance with the foregoing stipulation IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 26, 2016

Case 2:15-cv-01101-TLN-AC Document 20 Filed 01/27/16 Page 2 of 2