Mendez v. Community Health Clinics, Inc.

Filing 60

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER re 57 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 50 Second MOTION to Dismiss and for Sanctions filed by Raul Mendez. Mendez's Second Motion to Extend Time to Respond (Dkt. 57 ) is GRANTED. Mendez's Response is due on or before June 1, 2020. No further extensions will be allowed. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (ckh)

Case 1:16-cv-00425-DCN Document 60 Filed 05/15/20 Page 1 of 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
RAUL MENDEZ,

Case No. 1:16-cv-00425-DCN

Plaintiff,

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER

v.
COMMUNITY HEALTH CLINICS,
INC, dba TERRY REILLY HEALTH
SERVICES,
Defendant.
I. INTRODUCTION
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Raul Mendez’s Second Motion to Extend Time
to Respond. Dkt. 57. Having reviewed the record, the Court finds the parties have
adequately presented the facts and legal arguments in the briefs. Accordingly, in the interest
of avoiding further delay, and because the Court finds that the decisional process would
not be significantly aided by oral argument, the Court decides the pending motion on the
record and without oral argument. Dist. Idaho Loc. Civ. R. 7.1(d)(1)(B). For the reasons
set forth below, the Court will GRANT Mendez’s motion.
II. BACKGROUND
On March 25, 2020, Defendant Community Health Services, Inc. (“Community
Health”) filed its Second Motion to Dismiss and for Sanctions. Dkt. 50. Pursuant to Local
Rule 7.1(c), a deadline of April 15, 2020, was automatically set for Mendez’s response.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER – 1

Case 1:16-cv-00425-DCN Document 60 Filed 05/15/20 Page 2 of 4

On April 5, 2020, Mendez filed a Motion for Extension of Time to Respond. Dkt.
53. Referencing the ongoing pandemic, Mendez explained he had limited access to internet
and/or legal materials and requested an extension until May 30—a 44-day extension—to
respond to Community Health’s motion. The Court found that while an extension was
warranted, “for the time being . . . a 30-day extension is sufficient” and set Mendez’s
response deadline for May 15, 2020. Dkt. 56, at 3–4. The Court encouraged Mendez to
find means other than the local library to finish his briefing. Id.
Mendez informally contacted the Court on May 3, 2020, indicated that he would
need more time to finish his brief, and requested that the deadline be extended—similar to
his first request—to June 1, 2020. Mendez subsequently filed an email motion requesting
the same. Dkt. 57.
Community Health objects to the current motion. Dkt. 59. In its estimation, Mendez
has had sufficient time to work on his legal materials and should be required to file them
forthwith. Additionally, Community Health notes that Mendez continually fails to
coordinate these issues with them as directed by the Court. Ultimately, Community Health
argues that Mendez has not met the requisite good cause standard, did not heed the Court’s
prior admonitions to use means other than the law library to complete his briefing, did not
meet and confer with them, and will only continue to delay this case if granted an extension.
III. ANALYSIS
As the Court noted previously, the underlying motion at issue—i.e. Community
Health’s Motion to Dismiss and for Sanctions—relates to Mendez’s conduct during this
case. The Court will discuss the behavior of both parties in its decision on that motion, but
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER – 2

Case 1:16-cv-00425-DCN Document 60 Filed 05/15/20 Page 3 of 4

will not delve substantively into it here. That is not to say, however, that the Court is
discounting any current behavior in relation to the instant request.
To be sure, Mendez has continually failed to abide by the Court’s informal and
formal instructions that he needs to communicate with opposing counsel on all issues—
including simple procedure matters. Even in the adversarial process that is our legal system,
the parties must communicate in order to ensure “the just, speedy, and inexpensive
determination of every action and proceeding.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. Mendez’s continuing
refusal to work with—or at a minimum, to simply reach out to—Community Health
frustrates that process.
Additionally, the Court understands Community Health’s concerns and agrees that
Mendez’s motion is light on details. Mendez has admitted that his brief is all but complete,
but states that he needs additional time to add legal citations and authority and that he can
only do that at the law library. The Court is sympathetic to Mendez’s situation, but as it
noted previously, Mendez may need to “find alternative means (i.e. other than the local
library) to respond.” Dkt. 56, at 3.
These observations aside, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is unprecedented in
how it affects life and work and can be, in itself, good cause for an extension—even if
Mendez’s personal reasons are not as persuasive. Here, while there will be a delay, it is
slight. An additional 14 days will not unduly prejudice Community Health and will give
Mendez a full opportunity to brief the issues.
The Court encourages Mendez to utilizes all available means to complete his briefs.
Even if he cannot obtain access to a law library, he should nonetheless plan on filing his
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER – 3

Case 1:16-cv-00425-DCN Document 60 Filed 05/15/20 Page 4 of 4

briefs on or before June 1, 2020, as no further extensions will be granted in this matter.
IV. ORDER
1. Mendez’s Second Motion to Extend Time to Respond (Dkt. 57) is GRANTED.
Mendez’s Response is due on or before June 1, 2020. No further extensions will be
allowed.

DATED: May 15, 2020
_________________________
David C. Nye
Chief U.S. District Court Judge

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER – 4