Opinion
1:20-cv-3873-GHW
06-13-2022
SAMANTHA SIVA KUMARAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ADM INVESTOR SERVICES, INC., Defendant.
ORDER
GREGORY H. WOODS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
On June 13, 2022, Mr. Kostus called Chambers to inform the Court that he was ill and was struggling to upload submissions on ECF. The same day, Ms. Kumaran submitted a letter motion on the docket, detailing that she had learned that Mr. Kostus was unwell, and requesting “a stay and to hold in abeyance any filings that Kostus has to file until he gets better and can communicate on the phone.” Dkt. No. 168. The Court understands that Ms. Kumaran filed this motion on her own behalf because she cannot represent the corporate plaintiffs and therefore cannot request a stay on their behalf. Shortly after filing the motion on her own behalf, Ms. Kumaran filed a motion “at the direction of Mr. Kostus because he is not well enough to upload the letter himself.” Dkt. No. 169. The Court is sorry to hear that Mr. Kostus is suffering through a severe illness and wishes him a speedy recovery. Given the circumstances, the Court will consider the motion at Dkt. No. 169 as if it were filed by the corporate plaintiffs. However, the Court cautions that it expects all future communications on behalf of the corporate plaintiffs to be filed by counsel for the corporate plaintiffs, not by Ms. Kumaran.
Ms. Kumaran's request to stay this case until counsel for the corporate plaintiffs recovers, Dkt. No. 168, is denied. The Court will continue to consider applications for an extension of time of deadlines in this case. However, the Court declines to stay this case for an indefinite period of time.
The corporate plaintiffs' request for “an extension of any upcoming motions in 20-cv-3873 for corporate plaintiffs that may be due until [Mr. Kostus] returns to the office and gets better from the flu, ” Dkt. No. 169, is granted in part and denied in part. The Court understands that NRCM is seeking an extension of time to file a motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal. That request is granted; the deadline for NRCM to file a motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal is extended to June 23, 2022. The request for an extension of any other motion that may be due is denied without prejudice. The Court will consider renewed applications for extensions of time that specify the original deadlines that the corporate plaintiffs are seeking to extend. However, the Court declines to grant a generic request for an indefinite extension of any unspecified motion that may be due in the future.
The Court will hold a teleconference in this matter on June 17, 2022 at 4:00 p.m. The parties are directed to the Court's Emergency Rules in Light of COVID-19, which are available on the Court's website, for the dial-in number and other relevant instructions. The parties are specifically directed to comply with Rule 2(C) of the Court's Emergency Rules. The Court intends to discuss Mr. Kostus's failure to attend the conference held on June 10, 2022, as well as Mr. Kostus's failure to comply with the Court's June 2, 2022 order, Dkt. No. 158.
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions pending at Dkt. Nos. 168 and 169. SO ORDERED.