Corona v. City of Clovis et al

Filing 78

ORDER denying 77 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response by Chief Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Garza. (ag)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
JORGE RAY CORONA,
Plaintiff,
v.

CV No. 17-805 JCH/CG

CITY OF CLOVIS, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff Jorge Corona’s Motion for Extension
of Time to File Response to Notice of Supplemental Authority (“Motion to Extend”), (Doc.
77), filed July 10, 2019. In his Motion to Extend, Mr. Corona asks the Court for an
extension of time to file his response to Defendants’ Notice of Supplemental Authority,
(Doc. 74), filed June 28, 2019. (Doc. 77 at 1). Mr. Corona explains that “[d]ue to the
expiration of the ordered time which Plaintiff had to file a Response, Plaintiff did not
attempt to obtain approval from Defendants’ counsel.” Id. at 2.
Mr. Corona’s failure to seek concurrence from opposing counsel is a violation of
Local Rule 7.1. D.N.M. LR-CIV 7.1(a) (“Movant must determine whether a motion is
opposed, and a motion that omits recitation of a good-faith request for concurrence may be
summarily denied.”). As such, Mr. Corona’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Response
to Notice of Supplemental Authority, (Doc. 77), is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for
failure to comply with Local Rule 7.1(a).
IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________________________________
THE HONORABLE CARMEN E. GARZA
CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE