Boyd v. BJC Health System et al

Filing 34

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Reply to Plaintiffs Memoranda Objecting to Defendants' Responsive Pleadings (ECF No. 31 ) is GRANTED to and including April 20, 2017. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall comply with the local rules of this Court, including E.D. Mo. L.R. 2.01 pertaining to the format of documents for filing. Dated this 7th day of April, 2017. Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on 04/07/2017. (KCB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
SHARNICE JANAY BOYD,
Plaintiff,
V.

BJC HEALTH SYSTEM, d/b/a BJC
HEAL TH CARE and CHRISTIAN HOSPITAL
NORTHEAST-NORTHWEST,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:17CV814 RLW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Joint Motion for Extension of Time to
Reply to Plaintiffs Memoranda Objecting to Defendants' Responsive Pleadings (ECF No. 31).
Plaintiff has filed an objection to Defendants' request for additional time.
On March 2, 2017, Defendants removed this action from the Circuit Court of St. Louis
County, Missouri. Plaintiff filed a Pro Se Employment Discrimination and Retaliation
Complaint in state court under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et

seq. ("Title VII") and the Missouri Human Rights Act, Mo. Rev. Stat.§ 213.101 ("MHRA").
(ECF No. 7) Defendant Christian Hospital Northeast-Northwest ("Christian Hospital") has filed
a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs claims ofrace and disability discrimination. (ECF No. 18)
Defendant BJC Health System ("BJC") has filed a motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, for
summary judgment. (ECF No. 20) In response, Plaintiff has filed several memoranda objecting
to Defendants' motions and responsive pleadings. (ECF Nos. 23-6, 28, 30) Defendants now
request additional time to respond to Plaintiffs various objections. Specifically, Defendants
request ten (10) additional days to file reply memoranda.

Under Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, " [w]hen an act may or must be
done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time ... if a request is
made, before the original time or its extension expires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(l)(A). Here,
Plaintiff filed objections on March 31 , 2017 and April 3, 2017, with notice of these pleadings
delivered to Defendants via this Court's electronic filing system on April 3, 2017. Under this
court's local rules, Defendants' responses are due April 10, 2017 . 1 Defendants assert, however,
that they have requested a copy of Plaintiffs file with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission ("EEOC"), and that they anticipate receiving the file after April 11 , 2017.
Defendants contend that said file is necessary to address the arguments raised in Plaintiffs
objections.
The Court finds that Defendants have shown good cause for an extension of time, and the
motion will be granted. The Court also notes that although Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, such

"[p ]ro se litigants are required to follow the same rules of procedure, including the local court
rules, that govern other litigants." Escobar v. Cross, No. 4:12CV00023-JN, 2013 WL 709113 ,
at *1 (E.D. Ark. Feb. 27, 2013) (citation omitted); see also Lindstedt v. City of Granby, 238 F.3d
933 , 937 (8th Cir. 2000) ("A prose litigant is bound by the litigation rules as is a lawyer[.]").
This court' s local rules provide, " [a]ll filings, unless otherwise permitted by leave of Court, shall
be double spaced typed .... " E.D. Mo. L.R. 2.0l(A)(l). Future pleadings filed by the Plaintiff
shall be double spaced in compliance with this rule.
Accordingly,

1

Under the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri,
"[w]ithin seven (7) days after being served with a memorandum in opposition, the moving party
may file a reply memorandum." E.D. Mo. L.R. 4.01.
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Joint Motion for Extension of Time to
Reply to Plaintiffs Memoranda Objecting to Defendants' Responsive Pleadings (ECF No. 31) is

GRANTED to and including April 20, 2017.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall comply with the local rules of this
Court, including E.D. Mo. L.R. 2.01 pertaining to the format of documents for filing.
Dated this 7th day of April, 201 7.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3