Nicole Romano v. SCI Direct, Inc., et al

Filing 18

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE APPLICATION 17 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court DENIES Plaintiffs ex parte application to strike Defendants opposition. Plaintiff shall file any reply in support of its motion on or before July 25, 2017. The hearing on Plaintiffs motion shall remain on calendar for August 7, 2017. (lc). Modified on 7/19/2017 (lc).

O

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

United States District Court
Central District of California

8
9
10
11

NICOLE ROMANO, individually and on

12

Case № 2:17-cv-03537-ODW (JEM)

behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,

13
14

v.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
EX PARTE APPLICATION [17]

15

SCI DIRECT, INC.; and DOES 1–50,

16

inclusive,

17

Defendants.

18
19

On July 10, 2017, Plaintiff Nicole Romano filed a motion to extend the Rule

20

23-3 deadline for class certification until February 5, 2018, and served the motion

21

electronically on Defendant SCI Direct, Inc. (ECF No. 14.) At 12:04 a.m. on July 18,

22

2017, Plaintiff filed a notice of non-opposition. (ECF No. 15.) At 10:49 a.m. on July

23

18, 2017, Defendant filed its opposition, noting that the opposition was not late filed

24

because Plaintiff had not served its motion a full twenty-eight days before the hearing

25

date. (Opp’n 2 n.1, ECF No. 16.) At 12:41 p.m. on July 18, 2017, Plaintiff filed the

26

instant ex parte application to strike Defendant’s late-filed opposition. (ECF No. 17.)

27

Regardless whether Defendant’s opposition was late filed or not, Plaintiff has

28

not shown that it was in any way prejudiced by Defendant’s “late filing.” See Kolob

1

Heating & Cooling v. Ins. Corp. of N.Y., 154 F. App’x 569, 570 (9th Cir. 2005)

2

(upholding district court decision to allow late filing, where the filing was four days

3

late and did not result in prejudice). Further, Defendant has not previously filed any

4

document late. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s ex parte application to

5

strike Defendant’s opposition. Plaintiff shall file any reply in support of its motion on

6

or before July 25, 2017. The hearing on Plaintiff’s motion shall remain on calendar

7

for August 7, 2017.

8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
July 18, 2017

11
12
13

____________________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2