Opinion
Case No. 2:12-CR-0004-MMD-(GWF)
02-01-2013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. QASIR MUKHTAR, et. al., Defendants.
Paul S. Padda, Esq. (NV Bar No. 10417) COHEN & PADDA, LLP Attorneys for Qasir Mukhtar
Paul S. Padda, Esq. (NV Bar No. 10417)
COHEN & PADDA, LLP
Attorneys for Qasir Mukhtar
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION
OF TIME TO FILE A REPLY TO THE GOVERNMENT'S
OPPOSITION TO HIS MOTION FOR PRETRIAL
RELEASE AND FOR SUSPENSION OF LOCAL RULE 47-7
(Second Request)
Certification: In accordance with Local Rule 12-1(c), Defendant Qasir Mukhtar, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby certifies that this motion is filed past the deadline of January 30, 2013.
By Order dated January 29, 2013 (Pacer document 284), the Court granted Mr. Mukhtar until January 30, 2013 to file a reply to the government's opposition to his second motion for pretrial release. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 45(b)(1)(B), Defendant respectfully requests that the Court extend Defendant's time to file a reply by one business day or until January 31, 2013. Mr. Mukhtar also requests that the Court suspend the requirements of Local Rule 47-7.
The Court has scheduled a hearing for February 4, 2013. However, Defendant is amenable to a short postponement of the hearing in order to give the Court ample time to fully consider the second motion for pretrial release.
In support of this motion, Defendant relies upon the memorandum of points and authorities set forth below.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 45(b)(1)(B) provides that a court may permit a party to perform an act, past the appointed deadline, based upon "excusable neglect." In this case, good cause exists to extend the current deadline for filing a reply to the government's opposition to Defendant's motion for pretrial release.
Undersigned counsel spent the better part of yesterday working to complete Defendant's reply. The reply was completed at approximately 11:30 p.m. last night. However, undersigned counsel experienced difficulties when attempting to convert the reply brief document to PDF format in order to file it through the Court's CM/ECF system. Once the problem was resolved, undersigned counsel filed the reply brief but not until 3 seconds after the stroke of midnight. Accordingly, the brief was filed past the appointed deadline of January 30, 2013. While it would have been better to have completed the brief earlier in the day, as noted in Defendant's prior motion for extension of time undersigned counsel has been battling illness. Thus, despite best efforts, and based upon technical difficulties, undersigned counsel was not able to timely file the reply brief thereby necessitating the filing of this motion. Because the reply brief was only filed 3 seconds past the January 30, 2013 deadline, the government will experience no prejudice should the Court grant this second motion for extension of time to enlarge Defendant's time to file a reply brief to and until January 31, 2013.
In addition to the foregoing, Defendant also respectfully requests that the Court suspend the requirements of Local Rule 47-7 which imposes a page limit of 20-pages on reply briefs and requires briefs that exceed that limit to be accompanied by a table of contents. The reply brief that was filed last night by undersigned counsel is approximately 22-pages. As this Court is aware, Local Rule IA 3-1 permits the Court to suspend any local rule if the interests of justice so require. In this case, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court suspend the requirements of Local Rule 47-7 with respect to the reply brief that was filed by Defendant shortly past midnight on January 31, 2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court grant Defendant the relief requested herein.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________
Paul S. Padda, Esq.
COHEN & PADDA, LLP
4240 West Flamingo Road, #220
Las Vegas, Nevada 89103
Tele: (702) 366-1888
Fax: (702) 366-1940
Web: caplawyers.com
Attorney for Qasir Mukhtar
IT IS SO ORDERED:
Defendant is provided a 1-business day extension
of time, to and until January 31, 2013, to file a
reply to the government's opposition to
Defendant's second motion for pretrial release.
Additionally, the Court hereby suspends the
requirements of Local Rule 47-7 with respect to
the reply brief.
_____________
United Sates Magistrate Judge