Opinion
3:21-cv-00400-LRH-CSD
10-12-2022
ALL BUILDING AND PROPERTY SERVICES, INC., a Nevada corporation Plaintiff, v. ROBERT E. POOLE, TRUSTEE DOROTHY D. POOLE TRUST; DOROTHY D. POOLE TRUSTEE DOROTHY D. POOLE TRUST; DOROTHY D. POOLE TRUST; VISTA POINTE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, a Nevada Non Profit Cooperative Corporation; LEACH KERN GRUCHOW ANDERSON SONG, LTD., a Nevada Limited Liability Company; SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT; DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants.
JASON M. FRIERSON United States Attorney BLAINE T. WELSH Assistant United States Attorney Attorney for Defendant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Kerry P. Faughnan, Esq., NSB #.12204 Attorney for Plaintiff All Building and Property Services, Inc.
JASON M. FRIERSON United States Attorney BLAINE T. WELSH Assistant United States Attorney Attorney for Defendant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Kerry P. Faughnan, Esq., NSB #.12204 Attorney for Plaintiff All Building and Property Services, Inc.
ORDER FOR EXTENSION (Second Request)
EARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Defendant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (“Defendant”) and Plaintiff All Building and Property Services, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) stipulate, subject to this court's approval, that Defendant shall have until October 31, 2022 to file a reply in support of Defendant's motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 6). This is the second request for an extension of Defendant's reply deadline.
Defendant requires additional time because the AUSA who is handling this case was injured in a recent accident and will be unable to prepare a reply for at least the next three weeks. (If the court requires, Defendant will submit a more detailed explanation of the circumstances under seal.)
In addition, counsel for Defendant avers that a number of civil division attorneys in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Nevada have left the office in the past 11 months and two more have announced their intention to move to other U.S. Attorney's Offices by year's end. See Declaration of Blaine T. Welsh at ¶ 3. The vacancies have resulted in much higher-than-normal workloads for attorneys in the civil division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Nevada and those workloads would prevent any of the remaining AUSAs from being able to respond before October 31, 2022. Id.
Under these circumstances, the parties submit that good cause exists for an extension allowing Defendant up to and including October 31, 2022 to file a reply in support of Defendant's motion to dismiss See Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b)(1)(A) (“When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time...with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires[.]”) (emphasis added).
This stipulation is made in good faith and not for the purpose of undue delay. (Id.).
CONCLUSION
For the reasons argued above, Defendant and Plaintiff respectfully stipulate that the deadline to file the reply in support of Defendant's motion to dismiss be extended to October 31, 2022.
IT IS SO ORDERED: