From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Candow v. Dust

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Mar 25, 2013
Case No.: 2:11-cv-00343-LRH-GWF (D. Nev. Mar. 25, 2013)

Opinion

Case No.: 2:11-cv-00343-LRH-GWF

03-25-2013

WILLIAM CANDOW, an individual; GERI CANDOW, an individual, Plaintiffs, v. DAVID DUST, an individual and CLAYTON COATINGS, INC., Defendants.


ORDER


Motion to Continue Discovery (#60)

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion to Continue Discovery (#60), filed on March 21, 2013. The discovery cutoff in this case is currently set for April 8, 2013. See Amended Scheduling Order, Doc. #58. Plaintiffs represent the only outstanding discovery regards the extent of Plaintiffs' alleged injuries. Plaintiff William Candow ("Candow") is scheduled for an operation on April 10, 2013, and represents that Defendants have requested to conduct an expert examination of Candow after the surgery. Plaintiffs therefore move to extend the discovery deadline to allow the examination and any necessary rebuttal.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants shall have until March 29, 2013 to respond to the instant Motion (#60). The Court shall hear the Motion on Thursday, April 4, 2013, at 11:00 AM in Las Vegas Courtroom 3A.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Motion for Order Shortening Time (#59) is denied as moot. Plaintiffs are instructed that under Local Rule 7-5(d), written requests for judicial assistance in resolving a dispute on an emergency basis shall be entitled "Emergency Motion" and be accompanied by an affidavit setting forth (1) the nature of the emergency, (2) the office addresses and telephone numbers of movant and all affected parties, and (3) a statement certifying that the other affected parties have been notified of the motion. Ex parte motions are motions filed with the Court but not served on the other parities. See LR 7-5(a). Under LR 7-5(b), all ex parte motions shall contain a statement showing good cause why the matter was submitted to the Court without notice to all parties. Ex parte motions and emergency motions are distinct.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Order Shortening Time (#61) is stricken as duplicative of Plaintiff's Motion (#59).

________________

GEORGE FOLEY, JR.

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Candow v. Dust

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Mar 25, 2013
Case No.: 2:11-cv-00343-LRH-GWF (D. Nev. Mar. 25, 2013)
Case details for

Candow v. Dust

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM CANDOW, an individual; GERI CANDOW, an individual, Plaintiffs, v…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Mar 25, 2013

Citations

Case No.: 2:11-cv-00343-LRH-GWF (D. Nev. Mar. 25, 2013)