McCarty v. Roos et al

Filing 161

ORDER Granting 160 Motion to Extend Time to Reply re 136 MOTION to Dismiss re: 133 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT. Replies due by 8/19/2013. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 7/23/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8

ROBERT JOSEPH MCCARTY,

9
10
11

2:11-CV-1538 JCM (NJK)

Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN V. ROOS, et al.,

12
Defendants.

13
14

ORDER

15

Presently before the court is state defendants Pat Saunders and Char Hoerth’s first motion

16

for enlargement of time. (Doc. # 160). State defendants seek a 28-day extension to file a reply to pro

17

se plaintiff Robert Joseph McCarty’s response to their motion to dismiss. (Id. at 2:4-6). Pro se

18

plaintiff has not responded.

19

State defendants seek the extension pursuant Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). (Id. at 1:27). State

20

defendants’ counsel represents that she was on extended medical leave and recently returned to the

21

office. Counsel states that she requires additional time to verify many of the allegations in pro se

22

plaintiff’s 30-page response before she files the reply.

23

Good cause appearing,

24

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that state defendants Pat

25

Saunders and Char Hoerth’s first motion for enlargement of time (doc. # 160) be, and the same

26

hereby is, GRANTED.

27

...

28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1
2
3

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that state defendants shall have up to, and including,
August 19, 2013, to file their reply.
DATED July 23, 2013.

4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-