Righthaven LLC v. Mostofi
Filing
43
ORDER that Defendants Motion for Enlargement of Time 37 is DENIED. Defendants Motion for Attorneys Fees 41 is DENIED as untimely. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 10/6/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10
RIGHTHAVEN, LLC,
11
Plaintiff,
12
v.
13
DEAN MOSTOFI,
14
Case No. 2:10-CV-1066-KJD-GWF
Defendant.
ORDER
15
16
Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Enlargement of Time (#37) to file
17
motion for attorney’s fees. Plaintiff filed a response in opposition (#38). Defendant sought an
18
extension of time on the last day, July 27, 2011, to file a motion for attorney’s fees as a prevailing
19
party in a copyright infringement action. The motion was filed by Clyde DeWitt, a Nevada attorney,
20
at the behest of Thomas C. Willcox, an attorney located in Washington, D.C., who appeared subject
21
to pro hac vice admission. However, Willcox never filed his pro hac vice application or appeared in
22
this action. Defendant alleges that he hired Willcox in order to represent him for the sole purpose of
23
recovering fees in this action, but at the conclusion of the requested extension period he decided to
24
continue representing himself. Defendant then filed his Motion for Attorney’s Fees (#41) on August
25
10, 2011, the last day of the requested extension period, and the same day that DeWitt moved to
26
withdraw as his attorney.
1
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6 (b) allows a court to accept a late filing when the failure to
2
act timely is the result of excusable neglect. Late filings caused by inadvertence, mistake or
3
carelessness are permitted under the Rule with approval of the court. See Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v.
4
Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. Partnership, 507 U.S. 380, 388 (1993). Here, Plaintiff has not shown
5
sufficient grounds for filing his motion for an extension late. Ostensibly, the extension was sought to
6
have an attorney get familiar with the case and prepare a motion. That did not happen. Therefore,
7
the Court denies the motion for an extension of time. Consequently, the Court denies the motion for
8
attorney’s fees as untimely.
9
10
11
12
13
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Enlargement of Time
(#37) is DENIED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees (#41) is DENIED
as untimely.
DATED this 6th day of October 2011.
14
15
16
17
_____________________________
Kent J. Dawson
United States District Judge
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
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?