Opinion
3:20-cv-00299-MMD-CSD
01-26-2022
JACOB SMITH, Plaintiff, v. CHARLES DANIELS, et al., Defendants.
AARON D. FORD Attorney General KAYLA D. DORAME, Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants
AARON D. FORD Attorney General
KAYLA D. DORAME, Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (SECOND REQUEST)
Defendants, David Craig, Justin Henley, and Daniel Mondragon, by and through counsel, Nevada Attorney General, Aaron D. Ford, and Deputy Attorney General, Kayla D. Dorame, hereby move this Court for extension of time to file a Motion for Summary Judgment. This Motion is made and based upon Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(A) and LR 26-3.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES I. FACTUAL ANALYSIS
This is an inmate civil rights action brought by Plaintiff Jacob Smith (Smith) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 6, 2021, this Court entered a scheduling order. (ECF No. 14.) The discovery cut off was November 4, 2021, and the dispositive motions were to be filed by December 3, 2021. Id. Defendants filed a motion for extension of time to file their motion for summary judgment on November 23, 2021 requesting this court extend the dispositive motions deadline from December 3, 2021 until February 1, 2022. (ECF No. 24.) Defendants' request was granted on November 24, 2021. (ECF No. 25.)
II. ARGUMENT
Defense counsel respectfully requests a sixty (60) day extension of time to file their dispositive motions from the current deadline of February 1, 2022 until April 4, 2022 . Defendants provide the following information in accordance with Local Rule 26-3.
The 2nd day falls on Saturday, April 2, 2022. Thus, the date has been adjusted accordingly.
A. Discovery Completed
Initial Disclosures were sent to Smith on September 2, 2021 and then a supplement was sent on November 9, 2021.
B. Discovery that Remains to be Completed
No additional discovery is needed in this matter.
C. Reasons Why the Deadlines Were Not Satisfied
Smith filed a motion for leave to amend prior complaint 1983 on November 18, 2021. (ECF No. 21.) Smith then filed a motion asking for written consent for leave to amend prior 1983 complaint on November 23, 2021. (ECF No. 22.) Defendants filed their response in opposition to plaintiff's motion for leave to amend prior complaint 1983 on December 2, 2021. (ECF No. 26.) Defendants then filed their response to plaintiff's motion asking for written consent for leave to amend prior 1983 complaint on December 7, 2021. (ECF No. 27.) Magistrate Judge Cobb entered a Report and Recommendation stating that Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend (ECF No. 21) should be denied and Smith's motion for Defendants' consent to amend (ECF No. 22) should be denied as moot. (ECF No. 28 at 9:14-17.) To date this Report and Recommendation has not been adopted by the Honorable Miranda M. Du, Chief United States District Judge.
Dispositive motion deadline: February 1, 2022
Joint pretrial order (if no dispositive motions filed): March 3, 2022
D. Proposed Deadlines
Dispositive motion deadline: April 4, 2022
Joint pretrial order (if no dispositive motions filed): May 2, 2022
E. Good Cause Supports this Request
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) governs extensions of time and provides as follows:
This Court should find good cause supports this request. When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time: (A) with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires; or (B) on motion made after the time has expired if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect.
Defendant's request is timely and will not hinder or prejudice Smith's case. This Court has not yet adopted or rejected the Report and Recommendation. Therefore, the parties are unclear as to what claims and defendants may apply after this Court's decision on the Report and Recommendation. More time provides all parties the opportunity to properly prepare, research, and write the dispositive motions in this case.
III. CONCLUSION
Defendants request this Court extend the deadline for dispositive motions in this matter. Defendants assert that the requisite good cause is present to warrant the requested extension of time. The request is timely. Therefore, the Defendants request additional time, up until April 4, 2022, to file a dispositive motion in this matter.
IT IS SO ORDERED.