Capps v. Law Offices of Peter W. Singer et al

Filing 6

ORDER Granting 3 Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time for Defendants to Respond to Complaint: Defendants shall respond to the complaint no later than December 30, 2015. Signed by Judge Cynthia Bashant on 11/6/15. (dlg)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

MARY CAPPS, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated,

11
12

Case No. 15-cv-2410-BAS(NLS)
ORDER GRANTING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO
COMPLAINT

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

LAW OFFICES OF PETER W.
SINGER, et al.,

15

[ECF No. 3]

Defendants.

16
17
18
19

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s filing titled “Notice of Extension of

20

Time for Defendants to Respond to the Complaint on or before December 3, 2015.”

21

The body of the filing conflicts with the caption in that the body states that the parties

22

wish to extend Defendants’ deadline to respond to the complaint to December 30,

23

2015.1 Even though the filing is not fashioned as a motion, it will be interpreted as

24

one because extensions of time require an order from the Court. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

25

6(b).

26
27
28

Plaintiff’s proposed order contains the same discrepancy as the filing. The caption states the
December 3, 2015 date while the body twice states the December 30, 2015 date. Because the body
is considered the substance of any court filing, the Court will presume Plaintiff meant to use the
December 30, 2015 date for the purposes of this order.
1

–1–

15cv2410

1

Rule 6(b) states that “[w]hen an act may or must be done within a specified

2

time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time . . . with or without motion or

3

notice if the court acts, or if a request is made before the original time or its extension

4

expires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). Here, Plaintiff fails to demonstrate good cause.

5

She merely states that the parties have “agreed to an extension of time.” But Plaintiff

6

fails to provide any support for that assertion—Plaintiff’s motion does not contain

7

Defendants’ counsel’s signature, and Plaintiff’s counsel does not submit a declaration

8

recounting the parties’ purported agreement.

9

Though Plaintiff fails to demonstrate good cause, the Court will nonetheless

10

extend Defendants’ deadline to respond to the complaint because Plaintiff’s request

11

is technically made to her detriment as she is entitled to a response within 21 days of

12

serving the complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1). Accordingly, the Court

13

GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion; Defendants shall respond to the complaint no later than

14

December 30, 2015.

15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17

DATED: November 6, 2015

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
–2–

15cv2410