Opinion
20-1372-JWB
10-04-2022
KURT CHADWELL, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Decedent E.E. Chadwell, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JOHN W. BROOMES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's fourth motion for an extension of time to file an objection to Magistrate Judge Gale's Memorandum and Order granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend. (Doc. 64.) Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter.
This case was originally filed on December 31, 2020. (Doc. 1.) Defendant moved for dismissal of the complaint on June 14, 2021. (Doc. 10.) Due to COVID-19 and other issues, Plaintiff sought and received eight extensions of time to file a response to the motion to dismiss. (Docs. 13, 15, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28.) On February 24, 2022, this court entered an order granting the motion to dismiss but allowing Plaintiff to file a motion to amend within 30 days. (Doc. 33.) Plaintiff timely filed a motion to amend but again sought several extensions of time with respect to the briefing on the motion to amend. (Docs. 41, 43, 45, 48.) On July 29, Magistrate Judge Gale entered an order granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend. (Doc. 52.) Plaintiff's deadline to file an objection to this order was August 18, 2022.
Plaintiff has sought an extension of this deadline on three previous occasions. (Docs. 55, 59, 62.) In his motions, Plaintiff provides an extensive explanation of his need for an extension. Plaintiff's explanations typically involve his health conditions, lack of access to research, and the amount of time he spends on research. Plaintiff has now moved for a fourth extension of time to file an objection. (Doc. 64.) Plaintiff's motion again discusses his physical health, his need to conduct legal research, the extensive discovery, and access to legal research. While the court is sympathetic to Plaintiff's ongoing health conditions, this court has an obligation to ensure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding. Fed.R.Civ.P. 1. Plaintiff also has an obligation to prosecute the action that he brought to this court. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41. This action has been on file for almost two years but the docket reflects that there is not a current scheduling order on file due to the ongoing motions and extensions sought. This court will not allow this action to continue to be delayed.
Plaintiff will be allowed one final extension to file his objections, if any, to Magistrate Judge Gale's memorandum and order. Plaintiff must file his objection on or before October 14, 2022. Plaintiff is also on notice that this court will not entertain repetitive motions for extensions of time. Should Plaintiff continue to delay the prosecution of this matter, the court will contemplate entering sanctions which could include ruling on defense motions without allowing Plaintiff to file a response and dismissing this action for failing to prosecute.
Plaintiff's motion for an extension (Doc. 64) is GRANTED. Plaintiff must file his objection on or before October 14, 2022.
IT IS SO ORDERED.