Bethel et al v. City of Montgomery et al (MAG+)
ORDER; 74 Motion to Reconsider and Motion for an Extension of Time to File Objection to Magistrates Recommendation is denied. Signed by Hon. Chief Judge Mark E. Fuller on 3/26/2010. (jg, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA N O R T H E R N DIVISION O R L A N D O BETHEL, et al., P la in tif f s , v. C IT Y OF MONTGOMERY, et al., D e f e n d a n ts. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
C A S E NO. 2:04-cv-743-MEF-CSC (W O - DO NOT PUBLISH)
ORDER O n March 2, 2010, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation, re c o m m e n d in g that this case be dismissed with prejudice. (Doc. #71). Plaintiffs had until M a rc h 16, 2010 to file objections. On March 17, 2010, without objection, this Court adopted t h e Report and Recommendation and entered a final judgment in this case. (Docs. #72 & 7 3 ). A week later, on March 24, 2010, Plaintiffs filed their first response to the Report and R e c o m m e n d a tio n , in the form of a Motion to Reconsider and Motion for an Extension of T im e to File Objection to Magistrates Recommendation. (Doc. #74). As cause for an e x te n s io n , Plaintiffs stated only that an extensive period of inactivity had preceded the M a g is tra te Judge's entering of the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiffs did not state that th e y received the Report and Recommendation close to or after the deadline for filing o b je c tio n s , nor did they give any cause for neglecting to file their motion for an extension u n til more than a week after that same deadline had passed. W h e n an act must be done within a specified time and that time has expired, the Court
may only grant a motion to extend that time for good cause and because of excusable neglect o n the part of the moving parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED th a t the motion (Doc. #74) is DENIED. DONE this the 26th day of March, 2010. /s/ Mark E. Fuller CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?