M.G. et al v. New York City Department of Education et al

Filing 419

ORDER granting 418 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. The State's points are well taken about the time Plaintiff has had with the recently-produced documents, and the belated timing for the request for an extension. However, because Plaintiff's proposal does not extend the overall briefing period or compromise the State's time to respond, the extension is granted. Motion to compel due March 5, 2024; State opposition due April 5, 2024; reply due April 15, 2024. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger on 2/29/2024) (mml)

set that deadline, so Plaintiffs have had plenty of time to include its contents in their motion.
Plaintiffs give no explanation for waiting two weeks after the production was made and less than
two days before the motion is due to request the extension. Finally, Plaintiffs have already received
innumerable extensions in this case, which has delayed the case to the prejudice of the State
Defendants.”1
Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request a very short extension of four (4) days to file
their motion. As discussed above, this extension will not impact the original deadline for the fully
briefed date of Plaintiffs’ motion and thus there is no prejudice to any party.
We thank the Court for its consideration of this request.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Elisa Hyman
__________________
Elisa Hyman, Esq.
cc: Counsel of record

The Plaintiffs, children with disabilities and their parents, dispute that the State Defendants have been prejudiced
by any extension in this case concerning discovery.
1

2