Castellanos v. Aramark Corporation

Full title: JOAQUIN G. CASTELLANOS, Plaintiff, v. ARAMARK CORPORATION, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: Nov 4, 2010

Case No. 2:09-cv-01378-JCM-PAL (D. Nev. Nov. 4, 2010)

Opinion

Case No. 2:09-cv-01378-JCM-PAL.

November 4, 2010

ORDER (Mot. for More Time — Dkt. #27) (Mot. For More Time — Dkt. #28)

PEGGY LEEN, Magistrate Judge

Before the court is a one-line request (Dkt. #27) from the Plaintiff for "more time, about month, to have to aplica for attorney", and another request for "30 additional days to find legal counsel for this matter." The plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis which means he did not have to pay the filing fee because he could not afford it. He is also appearing pro se, which means he is representing himself. Plaintiff, may, but is not required to retain an attorney to represent him. A discovery plan and scheduling order has been entered which establishes deadlines for the parties to complete discovery, designate experts and file motions with the court. However, no deadline has been imposed for plaintiff to decide whether or not to hire an attorney. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's requests (Dkt. #27, 28) are DENIED as moot.

Dated this 1^st day of November, 2010.