Garity v. Dohahoe
Filing
40
ORDER Granting in part and Denying in part 37 Defendant's Motion to Extend Time to Respond. Patrick Dohahoe answer due 3/21/2013. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no further extensions of the response deadline will be considered. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 02/19/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8
9
10
11
ROSEMARY GARITY,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
PATRICK DOHAHOE,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________)
Case No. 2:11-cv-01805-MMD-CWH
ORDER
12
This matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to Respond
13
(#37), filed on February 8, 2013. The Court also considered Plaintiff’s Response (#39), filed on
14
February 15, 2013.
15
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) provides “[w]hen an act may or must be done
16
within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time: (A) with or without motion
17
or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires.”
18
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A). Good cause is equated with the exercise of due diligence. Guillen v.
19
Owens, 2011 WL 6032861 (D.Ariz.) (citing Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604,
20
609 (9th Cir. 1992)). Staffing changes do not ordinarily satisfy the good cause standard of Rule 6.
21
Guillen, 2011 WL 6032861 *2.
22
Here, the Office of the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada requests an
23
extension, until April 1, 2013, to file a response to Plaintiff’s amended complaint. Counsel
24
indicates that he was unable to comply with the deadline for responding to the amended complaint,
25
February 11, 2013, due to a heavy schedule and pressing deadlines in other cases. In addition, the
26
motion alleges that agency counsel for the USPS has been unavailable, but does not specify when
27
agency counsel will become available and why such assistance is needed. This appears to be an
28
instance where finding good cause for an extension runs the risk of allowing the exception
1
overcome the rule. Nevertheless, the Court will grant the requested extension given the factually
2
complex amended complaint, but will limit it to thirty (30) days. Thus, Defendant must file a
3
response to Plaintiff’s amended complaint on or before March 21, 2013. No further extensions of
4
the response deadline will be considered.
5
Based on the foregoing and good cause appearing therefore,
6
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Extension of Time to Respond
7
(#37) is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant shall file a response to Plaintiff’s
8
amended complaint on or before Thursday, March 21, 2013.
9
10
11
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no further extensions of the response deadline will be
considered.
DATED this 19th day of February, 2013.
12
13
14
______________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
