Moberly v. Bank of America, N.A.

Filing 46

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb, on 7/8/2016, denying ECF No. 45 Stipulation to Extend Discovery Cut-Off Date and Related Deadlines. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

DEBORAH L. MOBERLY,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
vs.
)
)
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et.al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
________________________________________)

3:15-cv-00122-MMD-WGC
MINUTES OF THE COURT
July 8, 2016

PRESENT: THE HONORABLE WILLIAM G. COBB, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEPUTY CLERK:

KATIE LYNN OGDEN REPORTER: NONE APPEARING

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S): NONE APPEARING
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S): NONE APPEARING
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS:
The court is in receipt of the parties’ proposed Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery
Cut-off Date and Related Deadlines. (ECF No. 45.) The stipulation for an extension of time is not
in compliance with LR IA 6-1(a), which provides:
(a)

A motion or stipulation to extend time must state the reasons for the extension
requested and must inform the court of all previous extensions of the subject
deadline the court granted. (Examples: “This is the first stipulation for extension of
time to file motions.” “This is the third motion to extend time to take discovery.”) A
request made after the expiration of the specified period will not be granted unless
the movant or attorney demonstrates that the failure to file the motion before the
deadline expired was the result of excusable neglect. Immediately below the title of
the motion or stipulation there also must be a statement indicating whether it is the
first, second, third, etc., requested extension, i.e.:
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE MOTIONS
(First Request)

The motion/stipulation is therefore DENIED. The court will approve a revised stipulation
which complies with the rule.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK
By:

/s/
Deputy Clerk