Opinion
2:20-CV-1562 JCM (BNW)
03-11-2024
C.M., individually and as parent to D.M., et al., Plaintiffs, v. JESUS JARA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Presently before the court is defendant Clark County School District (“defendant”)'s motion to extend time to file its reply in support of its motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 146). Plaintiffs did not file a response to defendant's motion.
Defendant filed its motion for summary judgment on January 18, 2024. (ECF No. 140). Plaintiffs filed their response on February 9, 2024. (ECF No. 145). The deadline to file a reply lapsed on February 23, 2024. That same day, defendant moved the court to give defendant until March 15, 2024, to file its reply. (ECF No. 146 at 3).
The response itself indicates it was filed on February 8, 2024, but the docket shows a submission date of February 9, 2024, at 12:07 a.m. PST. Accordingly, plaintiffs' response is technically late.
Defendant argues that there is good cause to grant the motion because it concluded a three-week jury trial on March 8, 2024, in another matter. (Id. at 2).
Taking into account defendant's reason for moving the court and plaintiffs' failure to file a response in opposition, the court finds there is good cause to grant defendant's motion for extension of time. See Martin v. Domino's Pizza, No. 2:22-cv-00784-GMN-DJA, 2022 WL 4000640, at *2 (D. Nev. Aug. 31, 2022) (ruling that the “need to get up to date on a case and deal with competing deadlines is a reality of the legal profession, not an indication of irresponsibility.”).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that defendant Clark County School District's motion to extend time to file its reply in support of its motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 146) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED.
Defendant shall file its reply no later than March 15, 2024.