Message: so, you want a Nunchi update?
ANTON HANDAL (Bar No. 113812)
anh@handal-law.com
PAMELA C. CHALK (Bar No. 216411)
pchalk@handal-law.com
GABRIEL HEDRICK (Bar No. 220649)
ghedrick@handal-law.com
H
ANDAL & ASSOCIATES
1200 Third Avenue, Suite 1321
San Diego, California 92101
Tel: 619.544.6400
Fax: 619.696.0323
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
e.Digital Corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
TOPRAM Technology Inc., aka
TOPRAM Inc.,
Defendant.
Case No. 3:13-cv-2940-H-BGS
PLAINTIFF E.DIGITAL
CORPORATION’S UNOPPOSED
EX PARTE
MOTION TO
EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANT TO ANSWER OR
OTHERWISE RESPOND TO
THE COMPLAINT UNTIL
MARCH 17, 2014 OR
WHATEVER DATE THE
COURT DEEMS JUST AND
REASONABLE UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES
Assigned to the Honorable
Judge Marilyn L. Huff
Courtroom 15A (Annex)
TO THE CLERK OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA:
Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 12.1 and 7.2, Plaintiff e.Digital Corporation
(“Plaintiff”) hereby presents this
ex parte motion for an order extending the time
for Defendant TOPRAM Technology Inc., aka TOPRAM Inc. (“Defendant”) to
answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint (“Complaint”). (Dkt #1). Plaintiff
filed a Complaint in this action against the Defendant on or about December 6,
2013. (Dkt #1). Defendant has not appeared or otherwise responded to the
Complaint in this case to date. It is anticipated that this motion is unopposed.
I. THE STATUS OF SERVICE UPON THE DEFENDANT
Plaintiff has served the Summons and Complaint upon Defendant on or
about January 24, 2014. (
See, Dkt #11). Defendant’s response to the Complaint is
currently due on or before February 14, 2014.
II. BASIS FOR REQUEST FOR EXTENSION
Counsel for the Defendant has indicated that the Defendant needs additional
time to review the Complaint in this matter, to retain local counsel, and to prepare
a response to the Complaint. Time is also needed for the parties to consider and
discuss the possibility of an early resolution of this matter. If a resolution can be
reached in this matter, most likely such a resolution would be a global resolution
that would resolve this case in its entirety as to all the parties.
With the above in mind, Plaintiff seeks an extension of time for Defendant
to respond to the Complaint not for delay, but to, among other things, permit the
parties an opportunity to resolve Plaintiff’s claims without the need for further
litigation.
III. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully request that Defendant be provided an
extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint until March 17,
2014 or whatever date the Court deems just and reasonable under the
circumstances. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.2, Plaintiff will separately submit a
Proposed Order granting the relief requested.
Dated: February 13, 2014
HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
By: /s/Pamela C. Chalk
Pamela C. Chalk
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation Torram
14 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply