Pantone
Pantone v. 100 Speedlab, LLC
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FELIPE PANTONE, Case No. 25-cv-1490-BAS-SBC
12 Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
13 v. MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (ECF No. 5) 14 100% SPEEDLAB, LLC; SAULE, LLC;
and DOES 1-10, 15 Defendants. 16
17 18 Plaintiff files an Unopposed Motion to Extend Time for Defendants to Respond to 19 Complaint on Defendants’ behalf. (ECF No. 5.) Defendants have not yet responded to 20 Plaintiff’s Complaint in this case although Plaintiff served Defendants on June 12, 2025. 21 (ECF Nos. 3, 4.) Accordingly, Defendants’ deadline to respond to the Complaint passed 22 on July 3, 2025. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a) (requiring a response to a complaint be served 23 within twenty-one (21) days of service of the summons and complaint). 24 Plaintiff files the instant motion, arguing good cause exists for extending 25 Defendants’ deadline to respond on the grounds that “Defendants’ principal only recently 26 returned from vacation in Hawaii and thus has only recently been able…