Reuter et al v. Pompeo et al

Filing 33

ORDER Granting 32 Stipulation for Extension of Time re 26 Motion to Dismiss (First Request). Replies due by 10/14/2021. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 9/9/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Case 2:20-cv-02180-JCM-BNW Document 33 Filed 09/09/21 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

CHRISTOPHER CHIOU
Acting United States Attorney
District of Nevada
Nevada Bar Number 14853
HOLLY A. VANCE
Assistant United States Attorney
400 South Virginia Street, Suite 900
Reno, Nevada 89501
775-784-5438
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

9
10
11

THOMAS DAWSON REUTER and
DULCE VICTORIA GALINDO FELIX,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Case No. 2:20-cv-02180-JCM-BNW

Plaintiff,
Stipulation and Order for Extension
of Time

v.
ANTONY BLINKEN, U.S. Secretary of
State; ERIC S. COHAN, Consul General,
U.S. Consulate in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico;
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of
U.S. Department of Homeland Security;
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney
General, in their Office Capacities,

(First Request)

Defendants.

19
20
21

Plaintiffs Thomas Dawson Reuter and Dulce Victoria Galindo Felix, and

22

Defendants Antony Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State; Eric S. Cohan, Consul General, U.S.

23

Consulate in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico; Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of U.S. Department of

24

Homeland Security; and Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General (“Defendants”) hereby

25

stipulate and agree that Defendants may have a 30-day extension of time, from September

26

14, 2021 to October 14, 2021, to reply to Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Defendants’

27

Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 31).

28
1

Case 2:20-cv-02180-JCM-BNW Document 33 Filed 09/09/21 Page 2 of 2

1

An extension is needed because defense counsel only recently learned she will need

2

to undergo a medical procedure that will require at least two and a half weeks of recovery.

3

Under the circumstances, good cause exists to extend the time for Defendants to reply to

4

Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

5

6(b)(1)(A) (“When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for

6

good cause, extend the time…with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request

7

is made, before the original time or its extension expires[.]”) (emphasis added).

8

This is Defendants’ first request for an extension of time. See LR IA 6-1(a) (must

9

advise of previous extensions). Defense counsel contacted Plaintiff’s counsel regarding this

10

extension request, and he has advised that he does not oppose the request. This stipulation

11

is made in good faith and not for the purpose of undue delay.

12

Dated: September 9, 2021.

13

LAW OFFICE OF FELIPE D.J.
MILLAN, P.C.

CHRISTOPHER CHIOU
Acting United States Attorney

/s/ Felipe D.J. Millan
FELIPE D.J. MILLAN
Attorney for Plaintiffs

/s/ Holly A. Vance
HOLLY A. VANCE
Assistant United States Attorney

14
15
16
17
18

DATED:

September 9, 2021

IT IS SO ORDERED:

19
20
21

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2