Golden et al v. Mentor Capital et al

Filing 146

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Granting 140 Motion for Second Extension. Dispositive motions due by 12/15/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells on 11/29/17. (dla)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
GENA GOLDEN, an individual and SUSAN
GOLDEN, an individual,

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
GRANTING MOTION FOR SECOND
EXTENSION

Plaintiffs,
v.
Case No. 2:15-CV-00176-JNP
MENTOR CAPITAL, INC., a Delaware
corporation, LABERTEW & ASSOCIATES, a
Utah limited liability company, and Michael L.
Labertew, an individual,

District Judge Jill N. Parrish
Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells

Defendants.

MENTOR CAPITAL, INC., a Delaware
corporation,
Third-Party Plaintiff
v.
RICHARD GOLDEN, an individual, and
SCOTT VAN RIXEL, an individual,
Third-Party Defendants

Defendant Mentor Capital, Inc. moves the court for a second extension of the deadline to
file dispositive motions.1 The current deadline was November 17, 2017 and on November 14,
2017, prior to the expiration of that deadline, Mentor filed its motion seeking an extension until
December 15, 2017. The court will grant the motion.

1

Docket no. 140

The primary reason offered by Mentor in support of its motion is the discovery delays
that have been a part of this action. The court agrees there have been some discovery delays.
For example, discovery toward Third-Party Defendant Mr. Van Rixel was stayed for a time. 2 In
addition the court has entered multiple orders regarding other discovery issues. 3 In opposition
Plaintiffs point to the delay in filing the motion, other commitments by Plaintiffs’ counsel and
alleges that Mentor has had this missing discovery for months so an extension is not warranted.
In addition, Plaintiffs argue Mentor’s filing of a motion for reconsideration of the court’s order
granting Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment indicates that it already has whatever
information it needs to file dispositive motions. The court finds Plaintiffs cursory arguments
unpersuasive and not supported by the record.
Under Federal Rule 6(b) the court may, for good cause shown, extend the time for certain
deadlines. 4 Here, the court finds good cause based upon the record and Mentor’s arguments.
Accordingly, Mentor’s Motion for Extension of Time is GRANTED. 5
DATED this 29 November 2017.

Brooke C. Wells
United States Magistrate Judge

2

Docket no. 107.

3

Docket no. 105, docket no. 120, docket no. 127.

4

Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b).

5

Docket no. 140.

2