Opinion
Civil Action 21-cv-00747-CMA-NRN
05-18-2022
ZACHARY T. POLLARA, Plaintiff, v. MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter is before the Court on Motion to Withdraw as Counsel and Extend Time for Plaintiff to Respond to the Court's Rule to Show Cause filed by Plaintiff's counsel, Mohammed O. Badwan of the Sulaiman Law Group, Ltd. (Doc. # 37.) Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. filed a Response opposing Plaintiff's request for extension of time. (Doc. # 38.) For the following reasons, the Court denies Plaintiff's request for extension of time and reserves ruling on the Motion to Withdraw as Counsel.
Plaintiff's counsel first filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel on April 21, 2022. (Doc. # 30.) Therein, Plaintiff's counsel indicated that although the parties had reached a settlement in principle on November 18, 2021, Plaintiff had since “been largely unresponsive” to attempts to contact him. (Id. at 1.) The Court denied the Motion to Withdraw (Doc. # 30), set a Status Conference for May 11, 2022, and ordered that Plaintiff be present for the hearing. (Doc. # 32.) Despite being informed by his counsel that he was required to appear at the hearing via video, Plaintiff failed to appear for the hearing. See (Doc. # 36.) As a result of Plaintiff's failure to appear, the Court issued an order on May 11, 2022, (1) finding Plaintiff in contempt of Court; and (2) requiring Plaintiff to show cause in writing within seven (7) days as to why the Court should not sanction him for his failure to comply with the Court's order to appear for the Status Conference. (Id.) The Court warned that a possible sanction for Plaintiff's failure to show cause would be dismissal of his case with prejudice. (Id.)
On May 17, 2022, Plaintiff's counsel filed the instant Motion requesting an extension of time for Plaintiff to respond to the show cause order. (Doc. # 37.) In the Motion, Plaintiff's counsel asserts that he delivered the Court's order to Plaintiff via mail and email on May 11, 2022, and he also communicated with Plaintiff over the phone on May 12, 2022. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff “is requesting that the Court extend the deadline for Plaintiff to show cause from May 18, 2022 to June 1, 2022.” (Id. at 3.) In support, Plaintiff's counsel indicates that “[t]he extension will allow Plaintiff to secure documentation that is material to his response to show cause.” (Id. at 3.)
Having reviewed Plaintiff's Motion (Doc. # 37), the Court finds that no good cause has been shown for an extension of time for Plaintiff to respond to the show cause order. Although Plaintiff's counsel indicates that Plaintiff needs more time to gather documentation, no documentation is necessary for Plaintiff to explain why he has failed to comply with this Court's orders.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw as Counsel and Extend Time for Plaintiff to Respond to the Court's Rule to Show Cause (Doc. # 37) is DENIED IN PART. It is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time. The Court will reserve ruling on Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw as Counsel. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that unless Plaintiff shows good cause for his many failures to comply with Court orders by 11:59 P.M. today, May 18, 2022, Plaintiff's Complaint will be dismissed with prejudice.