United States et al v. Jaynes Corporation et al

Filing 134

ORDER Granting 133 Motion to Extend Time. Supplemental Brief due by 9/30/2015. Responses due by 10/7/2015. Replies due by 10/12/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 9/17/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

9
10

UNITED STATES FOR THE USE AND
BENEFIT OF AGATE STEEL, INC., et al.,

11
Plaintiff(s),
12
vs.
13
JAYNES CORPORATION, et al.,
14
Defendant(s).
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:13-cv-01907-APG-NJK
ORDER

16

On August 17, 2015, the Court ordered Defendants to file a supplemental brief and evidence

17

better explaining why they and/or the Army Corps believe any of the subject documents should be

18

sealed. Docket No. 115 at 4-5. Defendants were required to make that supplemental showing no later

19

than August 31, 2015. See id. On September 1, 2015, the Court construed Defendants’ supplemental

20

filing as a request for an extension of that deadline, and extended it to September 15, 2015. Docket No.

21

128. Now pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion for additional time, filed on September 16,

22

2015. Docket No. 133.1 The motion indicates that Defendants are continuing to confer with the Army

23

Corps regarding the underlying motions, but provides scant details on that process and the timeline for

24
25
26
27
28

1

Because the motion was filed after expiration of the deadline, Defendants were required to establish
excusable neglect in addition to good cause. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B). A showing of excusable neglect
was not made in the motion. As a one time courtesy to the parties, the Court will not require that showing
in this instance. Nonetheless, Defendants are cautioned moving forward that they are required to strictly
follow court orders and comply with court-ordered deadlines moving forward.

1

its completion. See id. at 3 (“Jaynes does not know the timeframe in which its request will be responded

2

to”). The Court will provide an additional extension but cautions both Defendants and the Army Corps

3

that they have been given ample time to make a showing that the underlying documents should be

4

sealed, and the Court is not inclined to grant further extensions of the deadline absent a significantly

5

more compelling showing of good cause. If Defendants and the Army Corps fail to provide sufficient

6

justification for the sealing of the documents at issue by the deadline provided below or fail to provide

7

sufficient justification for an further extension, the Court may unseal the documents.2

8

The Court hereby ORDERS as follows:

9

•

No later than September 30, 2015, Defendants must file a supplemental brief and

10

supporting evidence in relation to any of the subject documents for which sealing is still

11

sought. No later than September 30, 2015, Defendants must file on the public docket any

12

of the subject documents for which sealing is no longer sought.

13

•

14

Any response in opposition to the supplemental brief must be filed no later than October
7, 2015.

15

•

16

To the extent Defendants do not believe they can comply with the above deadlines, they must

17

file a proper request to extend them. Defendants are further ORDERED to serve a copy of this order

18

on the Army Corps as soon as practicable.

19
20

Any supplemental reply must be filed no later than October 12, 2015.

The Court hereby INSTRUCTS the Clerk’s Office to keep the subject documents sealed for the
time being.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22

DATED: September 17, 2015

23

______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

24
25
26
27
28

2

The Court herein expresses no opinion as to whether the documents at issue can be sealed
consistent with the applicable standards. See, e.g., Docket No. 115 at 4 (“There may well be compelling
reasons to seal the documents at issue, but those compelling reasons need to be articulated for each
document at issue”).
2