Holt v. US Bank N.A. et al

Filing 79

ORDER Denying 75 Motion for Order Granting Extension of Time to File First Amended Complaint. FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED and the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 1/16/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

9
10

RODNEY HOLT,

11

Plaintiff,

12

v.

13

Case No. 2:12-CV-00463-KJD-CWH

US BANK N.A., et al.,

14

ORDER

Defendants.

15
16
17
18

Before the Court is Motion for Order Granting Extension of Time to File First Amended
Complaint (#75). Defendants have filed an opposition (#76) and Plaintiff has filed a Reply (#77).
On September 7, 2012, the Court issued an Order (#73) dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint.

19

Plaintiff asserted a number of discredited legal theories in his original complaint and the Court noted

20

that it “has serious doubts that Plaintiff will be able to state any plausible claims if he chooses to

21

amend his Complaint.” However, the Court provided Plaintiff the opportunity to amend if he did so

22

within 14 days of the date of the order.

23

Plaintiff filed his request for an extension on the last day before the deadline expired.

24

Originally, Plaintiff did not state any reason for the requested extension. When Defendants objected

25

on this basis, Plaintiff filed a reply arguing that the deadline set by the Court was not convenient to

26

1

him, and making allegations that the timing of the Court’s order and removal of personal property

2

and “evidence” from his home were connected.

3

The Court declines to further extend Plaintiff’s time to file an amended complaint based on

4

the justifications offered by Plaintiff. Throughout this litigation, Plaintiff has demonstrated a pattern

5

of submitting voluminous filings, raising dubious arguments, and engaging in delay tactics. These

6

practices burden the Court and are prejudicial to the Defendants. Accordingly, the Motion is denied.

7
8
9
10
11

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Order Granting Extension of Time to File
First Amended Complaint (#75) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED and the Clerk of the Court is
directed to close this case.
16th
DATED this ______ day of January 2013.

12
13
14
15

_____________________________
Kent J. Dawson
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2