BOLDMAN et al v. WAL-MART STORES, INC. et al

Filing 78

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 77 Motion for Leave to File a Late Opposition. Plaintiffs must submit opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment by 11/13/2017. Signed by Judge Anne E. Thompson on 11/8/2017. (mmh)

RECEIVED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

NOV
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
AT 8:30

0 8 2017

Vi
WILL'iAMT. WALSH ·' '
CLEAi<

JOSEPH J. BOLDMAN and LAURA A.
BOLDMAN,

Civ. No. 16-0004

Plaintiffs,

v.

MEMORANDUM
OPINION AND ORDER

WAL-MART STORES, INC., WAL-MART
STORES, EAST, LP, and WAL-MART
STORES, EAST, INC.,
Defendants.

THOMPSON, U.S.D.J.
This matter has come before the Court upon the Motion for Leave to File a Late
Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment by Plaintiffs (ECF No. 77).
IT APPEARING THAT Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Arpert set an alternative briefing
timeline for Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on September 2Q, 2017 (ECF No. 69),
requiring Plaintiffs to file opposition by October 30, 2017; and it further
APPEARING THAT Plaintiffs made a minor, inadvertent clerical error as to the
appropriate due date for their opposition brief (Mastrondrea Deel., Ex. A ifif 14-16, ECF No. 772); and if further
APPEARING THAT this error falls within Rule 6 of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
justifying an extension of time for good faith excusable ne~ect, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(l)(B),
because this error and a subsequent extension for Plaintiffs will not cause Defendants any
prejudice or harm; the length of delay is minimal-Plaintiffs' counsel filed a letter (ECF No. 75)
and this Motion addressing the mistake just days after the missed deadline; this mistake does not
1

)

reflect complete incompetence, lack of diligence, or ignorance of the Federal and Local Rules;
and there is no indication that Plaintiffs acted in bad faith, see T.B. v. Mt. Laurel Bd. ofEduc.,
2011 WL 2473327, at *3 (D.N.J. June 20, 2011) (citing Consol. Freightways Corp. v. Lawson,
837 F.2d 916, 919 (3d Cir. 1987)) (listing factors the Third Circuit considers to assess excusable
neglect under Rule 6); see also Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P 'ship, 507
U.S. 380, 388 (1993); ·

~

IT IS on this rdayofNovember, 2017,
ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File a Late Opposition is GRANTED;
and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiffs must submit opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary
Judgment by November 13, 2017.

ANNE E. THOMPSON, U.S.D.

2