Vess v. MTD Consumer Group, Inc.

Filing 54

ORDER granting 51 Motion for Reconsideration. MTD Consumer has through and until April 21, 2017 to file as a separate docket item the response to the motion for intra-division transfer attached to its motion. Signed by District Judge Debra M. Brown on 4/19/17. (rel)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
ABERDEEN DIVISION
BILL D. VESS

PLAINTIFF

V.

NO. 1:16-CV-80-DMB-RP

MTD CONSUMER GROUP, INC.

DEFENDANT

ORDER
On April 12, 2017, MTD Consumer Group, Inc. filed “Defendant’s Motion for
Reconsideration of Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time or, Alternatively, Motion for
Leave to File Response Out of Time.” Doc. #51. In the motion, MTD Consumer requests
reconsideration of the Court’s denial of its initial motion for an extension to respond to the
plaintiff’s motion for an intra-division transfer,1 representing as grounds that (1) “two of [its
counsel’s] children were ill and unable to attend school for several days during the week of
March 27th;” (2) “unavoidable obligations in other matters required [its counsel] to be out of
town and away from the office on April 4, 5, and 6;” and (3) its counsel’s “colleagues of record
in this matter were unable to assist in the preparation of Defendant’s response in opposition due
to previous commitments in other matters.” Id. at 2. Alternatively, MTD Consumer requests
permission to file out of time the response in opposition to the intra-division transfer motion
attached to its reconsideration motion. Id.; Doc. #51-1. MTD Consumer represents that its
request for an extension is unopposed. Id.
Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides, in pertinent part, that “[w]hen
an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the
1

MTD Consumer filed its initial motion for an extension on April 10, 2017, the due date of its response. On April
12, 2017, the Court denied the motion because MTD Consumer failed to offer a reason or justification for the
requested extension in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b).

time … after the time has expired if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect.” Upon
consideration, MTD Consumer’s request to file an out of time response is GRANTED. MTD
Consumer has through and until April 21, 2017, to file as a separate docket item the response to
the motion for intra-division transfer attached to its motion.
SO ORDERED, this 19th day of April, 2017.

/s/ Debra M. Brown
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2