Richardson v. Hard Rock Hotel, Inc. et al

Filing 96

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion, 93 , is GRANTED.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have up to and including 2/9/16, to file responses to the pending Motions for Summary Judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that De fendants shall have fourteen days after the filing of Plaintiffs responses to file replies regarding the pending Motions for Summary Judgment.Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 1/14/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PS)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

LEON RICHARDSON,
4

Plaintiff,

5
6

vs.

7

HRHH GAMING SENIOR MEZZ, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company;
BENNIE MANCINO, an individual,

8
9

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:13-cv-1913-GMN-CWH
ORDER

10
11

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Leon Richardson’s Emergency Motion for an

12

Extension of Time and for Leave to File a Supplemental Response, (ECF No. 93).1 In this

13

Motion, Plaintiff requests an extension of time to respond to Defendant Bennie Mancino’s

14

Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 79), and leave to file an additional response

15

regarding Defendant HRHH Gaming Senior Mezz, LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment,

16

(ECF No. 75). Both of these Motions were filed at a time when Plaintiff was without counsel

17

in this case. As Plaintiff has recently obtained new counsel, additional time to file responses

18

will ensure that he does not suffer unfair prejudice in this action based on the withdrawal of his

19

prior counsel.

20

Therefore, good cause appearing,

21

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion, (ECF No. 93), is GRANTED.

22

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have up to and including February 9,

23

2016, to file responses to the pending Motions for Summary Judgment.

24
25

1

Though Plaintiff designated his Motion only as a request for an extension of time, the Court construes the
Motion also as a request for leave to file an additional response, as Plaintiff has already responded to Defendant
HRHH’s pending Motion for Summary Judgment, (ECF No. 85).

Page 1 of 2

1
2
3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall have fourteen days after the filing
of Plaintiff’s responses to file replies regarding the pending Motions for Summary Judgment.
14
DATED this _____ day of January, 2016.

4
5
6

___________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Court

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 2 of 2