Marsh et al v. Freedom Mortgage Corporation

Filing 6

ORDER on Joint Motion GRANTING #5 Nunc Pro Tunc Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher D. Baker on 11/26/2024. (Boren, Cori)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TERRANCE MARSH, ET AL.,

12
13
14

Plaintiffs,
v.
FREEDOM MORTGAGE
CORPORATION,

Case No. 1:24-cv-01304-CDB
ORDER ON JOINT MOTION GRANTING
NUNC PRO TUNC EXTENSION OF TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT
(Doc. 5)

15
Defendant.
16
17
18

Plaintiffs Terrance Marsh and Gesele Marsh initiated this action against Defendant

19

Freedom Mortgage Corporation in the Superior Court for the State of California, County of Kern,

20

case entitled Terrance Marsh and Gesele Marsh v. Freedom Mortgage, Case No.

21

BCV24101027, on March 28, 2024. (Doc. 1). Defendant was served with the summons and the

22

complaint on September 27, 2024, with an answer or other responsive pleading due on October

23

27, 2024. Id. Defendant removed the state court action to this Court on October 24, 2024. Id.

24

On October 31, 2024, the parties stipulated to a 26-day extension for Defendants to respond to

25

the complaint by November 22, 2024. (Doc. 4); see Local Rule 144(a).

26

Pending before the Court is the parties’ second stipulated request to extend by 17

27

additional days the deadline for Defendant to file its responsive pleading to the complaint

28

(through and including December 10, 2024). The parties’ joint motion was filed on November

1

22, 2024—three days after the parties’ stipulated deadline for Defendant’s response to the

2

complaint. (Doc. 5).

3

In the Eastern District of California, “[r]equests for Court-approved extensions brought on

4

the required filing date for the pleading or other document are looked upon with disfavor.” Local

5

Rule 144(d). While the Court finds good cause to grant the request, here, it should have become

6

apparent to the parties that they required an extension of time for Defendant to file a response to

7

the complaint before (not after) the November 22, 2024, filing deadline. The Court disfavors

8

granting relief nunc pro tunc and admonishes the parties to exercise better care and to adhere to

9

this Court’s Local Rules in all future filings.

10

In light of the stipulation and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

11

Defendant shall have until December 10, 2024, to file an answer or other responsive pleading

12

to Plaintiffs’ complaint. See Local Rule 144(a). Absent extraordinary circumstances, no further

13

extensions of the filing deadline will be granted.

14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15
16

Dated:

November 26, 2024

___________________

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2