Hughes-Rodriguez v. Caravan Facilities Management, LLC
Filing
65
OPINION AND ORDER: The Court denies the Plaintiff's motion for enlargement of time on the basis set forth in her motion 64 . However, the Court shall provide the Plaintiff an extension of time through and including 3/19/2021 to respond to the D efendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 58 based on the current state of the record as developed during discovery. Any future extensions requested by the Plaintiff must comply with N.D. Ind. L. R. 61. Signed by Judge Holly A Brady on 2/18/2021. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(bas)
USDC IN/ND case 1:19-cv-00359-HAB document 65 filed 02/18/21 page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
FORT WAYNE DIVISION
JODI HUGHES-RODRIGUEZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
CARAVAN FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 1:19-cv-00359-HAB-SLC
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is the Plaintiff’s motion for an extension of time to respond to the
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 64). In her motion, the Plaintiff, who is
proceeding pro se, explains that she believes she has newly discovered evidence that she would
like to pursue with the EEOC and that she believes is relevant to her case. Unfortunately, the time
for discovery closed on October 7, 2020. (ECF No. 52). Plaintiff has not requested nor shown
cause to reopen discovery and, at this stage of the proceedings, it is unlikely such a request would
be granted given the prejudice to the Defendant. See Schmelzer v. Muncy, 2019 WL 3842335 (S.D.
Ill. Aug. 14, 2019) (refusing to reopen discovery as it would result in increased costs and burdens
to the Defendant); Hess v. Biomet, Inc., 2019 WL 1282032 (N.D. Ind. March 20, 2019) (refusing
to permit amended pleadings where discovery has closed and summary judgment proceedings
would be disrupted). Accordingly, the Court denies the Plaintiff’s motion for enlargement of time
on the basis set forth in her motion. However, the Court shall provide the Plaintiff an extension of
time through and including March 19, 2021 to respond to the Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment based on the current state of the record as developed during discovery. Any future
extensions requested by the Plaintiff must comply with N.D. Ind. L. R. 6–1.
USDC IN/ND case 1:19-cv-00359-HAB document 65 filed 02/18/21 page 2 of 2
SO ORDERED on February 18, 2021.
s/ Holly A. Brady
JUDGE HOLLY A. BRADY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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?