UBS Financial Services, Inc v. Carolyn Garrett et al

Filing 23

ORDER vacating deadline imposed by the April 10, 2014 NEF 4 and denying as moot 21 Motion to Extend Time. The court directs the Courtroom Administrator to coordinate a scheduling conference. Not later than one week before conference, the parties shall file joint scheduling conference report. Please see attached for further details. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 6/2/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9
10
11
12
13

UBS FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
CAROLYN GARRETT, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________________)

3:14-cv-00141-LRH-WGC
ORDER
re: Doc. # 21

14
15

Before the court is Interpleader Plaintiff UBS Financial Services, Inc.'s Motion to Enlarge Time

16

to File Proposed Discovery Plan and Proposed Scheduling Order. (Doc. # 21.)1 Plaintiff states it was

17

"notified electronically that a proposed discovery plan and a proposed scheduling order should be filed

18

with the court by May 25, 2014." (Id. at 1.) Plaintiff is presumably referring to a Notice of Electronic

19

Filing (NEF) dated April 10, 2014, which provided those directions. According to Local Rule 26-1(f),

20

the standard terms and provisions of Local Rule 26–1(d) and (e) do not apply to interpleader actions.

21

Instead, scheduling in interpleader actions is governed by Local Rules 22-1 and 22-2. Therefore, the NEF

22

was erroneously issued by the CM/ECF system. The deadline imposed by the April 10, 2014 NEF is

23

VACATED and Plaintiff's motion (Doc. # 21) is DENIED AS MOOT.

24
25

However, the Plaintiff in an interpleader action still has certain scheduling responsibilities as are
imposed by Local Rule 22-2, which reads as follows:

26

In all interpleader actions, the plaintiff must file a motion requesting that
the Court set a scheduling conference. The motion must be filed within
thirty (30) days after the first defendant answers or otherwise appears. At
the scheduling conference, the plaintiff will advise the Court as to the

27
28
1

Refers to court's docket number.

1
2
3

status of service on all defendants who have not appeared. In addition, the
Court and parties will develop a briefing schedule or discovery plan and
scheduling order for resolving the parties' competing claims. If the
Plaintiff fails to prosecute the interpleader action by failing to file the
motion required by this Local Rule, the Court may dismiss the action.

4

Although Plaintiff has not filed a motion requesting the court to set a scheduling conference, the

5

court directs the Courtroom Administrator to coordinate a scheduling conference with the parties. Not

6

later than one week before the conference, the parties shall file a joint scheduling conference report

7

containing the information required to be provided under Local Rule 22-2, to include a briefing schedule

8

and/or discovery plan and scheduling order.

9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10

DATED: June 2, 2014.

11

_____________________________________
WILLIAM G. COBB
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2