Akers et al v. Keszei et al

Filing 349

ORDER Denying 346 Motion to Vacate the Date for Response to 324 MOTION Revoke Plaintiff's IFP Status and 325 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Complaint. Responses due by 1/3/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 12/15/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ASB)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9
10
11
12

MONTGOMERY CARL AKERS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
JAMES KESZEI, et al.,
)
)
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:07-cv-00572-JCM-GWF
ORDER
Motion to Vacate Response
Date (#346)

13
14

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate the Date for Response

15

to Defendant’s Motion to Revoke Plaintiff’s IPF Status and Motion to Dismiss (#346), filed on

16

December 8, 2011 and Defendants’ Response to Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Briefing Schedule

17

(#348), filed on December 14, 2011. Plaintiff requests that the Court vacate the response deadline

18

of December 20, 2011 for Defendant’s pending Motion to Revoke Plaintiff’s IPF Status (#324) and

19

Motion to Dismiss (#325). Plaintiff argues that he has been unable to retain counsel due to

20

unforseen circumstances, and that he cannot effectively go forward without counsel. Plaintiff

21

therefore requests that the Court vacate the response date until Plaintiff is able to retain counsel or

22

the Court appoints him counsel.1 Defendants oppose Plaintiff’s motion, arguing that Plaintiff has

23

already had over 75 days to respond to the pending motions, and Plaintiff has failed to show good

24

cause for any further extensions.

25

The Court previously granted Plaintiff an extension of time to respond to Defendant’s

26

pending motions, but cautioned Plaintiff that “any further request to extend the response deadline

27

will not be looked upon favorably by the Court.” (See # 342.) Upon review and consideration, the

28
1

Plaintiff currently has a Motion for Appointment of Counsel in a Limited Capacity (#345) pending before the Court.

1

Court will not grant Plaintiff’s request. Plaintiff has had over two months to secure counsel and

2

file a response to the pending motions and has failed to do so. Plaintiff, in pro per, has litigated this

3

case since it commenced in 2007. The Court finds no reason why Plaintiff cannot file a response to

4

the pending motions without the assistance of counsel. The Court will not vacate the response date

5

until Plaintiff obtains counsel. Given the amount of time that this motion has been pending before

6

the Court, the Court will grant Plaintiff some relief from the December 20, 2011 response deadline.

7

Plaintiff shall have until January 3, 2012 to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Revoke Plaintiff’s

8

IPF Status (#324) and Motion to Dismiss (#325). Accordingly,

9

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate the Date for Response to

10

Defendant’s Motion to Revoke Plaintiff’s IPF Status and Motion to Dismiss (#346) is denied.

11

Plaintiff shall have until January 3, 2012 to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Revoke Plaintiff’s

12

IPF Status (#324) and Motion to Dismiss (#325).

13

DATED this 15th day of December, 2011.

14
15
16

______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2