Opinion
2:22-cv-01753
04-04-2023
DAWNYELL FLYNN, an individual, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEVADA ex rel. NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, a public entity of the State of Nevada; DONALD BURSE, an individual; CHARLES DANIELS, director, in his official capacity; and Doe Nevada Department of Corrections Employees 1-10, in their individual and official capacities, Defendants.
AARON D. FORD Attorney General CRAIG A. NEWBY (Bar No. 8591) Attorney General Burau Chief D. RANDALL GILMER (Bar No. 14001) Chief Deputy Attorney General CHRIS DAVIS (Bar No. 6616) Senior Deputy Attorney General State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants State of Nevada ex rel. Nevada Department of Corrections and Charles Daniels AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NEVADA CHRISTOPHER PETERSON (Bar No. 13932) Attorneys for Plaintiff
AARON D. FORD Attorney General
CRAIG A. NEWBY (Bar No. 8591) Attorney General Burau Chief
D. RANDALL GILMER (Bar No. 14001) Chief Deputy Attorney General
CHRIS DAVIS (Bar No. 6616) Senior Deputy Attorney General State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General
Attorneys for Defendants State of Nevada ex rel. Nevada Department of Corrections and Charles Daniels
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NEVADA
CHRISTOPHER PETERSON (Bar No. 13932)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (FIRST REQUEST)
Jennifer A. Dorsey, U.S. District Judge
Defendants, Nevada Department of Corrections (NDOC) and Charles Daniels, and through counsel, Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney General, and Chris Davis, Deputy Attorney General, of the State of Nevada, and Plaintiff Dawnyell Flynn, by through counsel, Christopher Peterson, Esq, of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, pursuant to Local Rules IA 6-1, 6-2, and 7-1, hereby stipulate and agree to extend the time for Defendants NDOC and Daniels to file their reply in support of their motion to dismiss by fourteen days, from April 3, 2023, to Monday, April 17, 2023.
Plaintiffs and Defendants been in communication about potential settlement, which discussions have been ongoing. The extension would allow the parties to continue to focus on settlement. Moreover, while counsel for defendants has diligently attempted to timely complete the reply in the short time provided by the rules, counsel has been unable to do so because of his substantially increased caseload as a result of the departure of two other deputy attorney generals. Finally, Defendants twice previously agreed to extend the time for Plaintiff to respond to Defendants motion to dismiss, and therefore this short delay should not prejudice either party, is made in good faith, and not for the purposes of delay.
Accordingly, based on the foregoing and for good cause appearing, the parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, do hereby stipulate and agree that to extend the dispositive motion deadline by fourteen (14) days, and Defendant's reply in support of their motion to dismiss shall be due on or before Monday, April 17, 2023.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.