Opinion
Case No. 03-CV-75023-DT.
May 17, 2005
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO ENLARGE OR EXTEND THE TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S "MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT"
On March 31, 2005, Plaintiff filed his "Motion for Summary Judgment." On April 19, 2005, Defendants filed their "Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment." In their response, Defendants argue that Plaintiff's motion was "inappropriately filed and . . . should be dismissed." (Defs.' Resp. at ¶ 1.) Defendants assert that "despite the fact that the parties are in the process of taking depositions (including . . . Plaintiff's), and that . . . Defendants have recently submitted discovery requests to . . . Plaintiff regarding his claim for retaliation[,] harassment[,] and retaliatory discharge, Plaintiff now files a [m]otion . . . on these same issues." ( Id. at ¶ 5.) Defendants note that the court, in its March 11, 2005 "Order Setting Discovery," specifically "provided sixty days for discovery, which is not to expire until May 6, 2005." ( Id. at ¶ 6.) Defendants also state that "[b]efore . . . Defendants can even respond to Plaintiff's [m]otion . . . with respect to [r]etaliation, [h]arassment, and [r]etaliatory discharge and file their own respective motion on these issues, discovery must proceed." ( Id. at ¶ 7.) Defendants contend that "it is clear that discovery must be completed prior to . . . Defendants being able to respond to many of the blanket allegations brought forth in Plaintiff's motion. His motion is not timely and should be denied by [the] [c]ourt." ( Id. at ¶ 14.)
Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a):
A party seeking to recover upon a claim, counterclaim, or cross-claim or to obtain a declaratory judgment may, at any time after the expiration of 20 days from the commencement of the action or after service of a motion for summary judgment by the adverse party, move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in the party's favor upon all or any part thereof.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). As Plaintiff filed his Statement of Claim in this matter on February 23, 2005, more than 20 days have passed since the commencement of this action. In addition, the court did not instruct Plaintiff to refrain from filing his motion until discovery ended in its February 11, 2005 "Order Granting Defendants' `Motion for Summary Judgment [as to Plaintiff's Race Discrimination Count]' and Denying Plaintiff's `Motion for Summary Judgment Second Count Gender Discrimination and Racial Discrimination,'" but instead ordered Defendants to "inform the court in writing no later than March 2, 2005 whether additional discovery is needed or whether they intend to file a renewed motion for summary judgment." (2/11/05 Order at 13.)
The court will construe Defendants' response as a motion to enlarge or extend the time to answer Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(f); Plott v. General Motors Corp., Packard Elec. Div., 71 F.3d 1190, 1195-96 (1995). The court notes that discovery in the case will not end until May 6, 2005 and Defendants may very well require additional time after the close of discovery to prepare their response to Plaintiff's motion. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' motion to enlarge or extend the time to answer Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Defendants must file a response addressing the substance of Plaintiff's summary judgment motion no later than May 27, 2005.
IT IS SO ORDERED.