Mitchell v. U.S., CV-09-08089-PCT-DGC. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20180615930
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jun. 14, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 14, 2018
Summary: ORDER DAVID G. CAMPBELL , District Judge . Before the Court is Defendant's unopposed motion for an extension of time to file a reply in support of his motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6). (Doc. 77.) Defendant acknowledges that the deadline to file his reply under Local Rule 7.2(d) has passed. ( Id. at 2.) Accordingly, his requested extension may be granted on a showing of good cause and excusable neglect. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B) ("When an act may or must be done within a
Summary: ORDER DAVID G. CAMPBELL , District Judge . Before the Court is Defendant's unopposed motion for an extension of time to file a reply in support of his motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6). (Doc. 77.) Defendant acknowledges that the deadline to file his reply under Local Rule 7.2(d) has passed. ( Id. at 2.) Accordingly, his requested extension may be granted on a showing of good cause and excusable neglect. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B) ("When an act may or must be done within a ..
More
ORDER
DAVID G. CAMPBELL, District Judge.
Before the Court is Defendant's unopposed motion for an extension of time to file a reply in support of his motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6). (Doc. 77.) Defendant acknowledges that the deadline to file his reply under Local Rule 7.2(d) has passed. (Id. at 2.) Accordingly, his requested extension may be granted on a showing of good cause and excusable neglect. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B) ("When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time . . . on motion made after the time has expired if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect.").
A mistake in docketing does not ordinarily constitute excusable neglect. See Briones v. Riviera Hotel & Casino, 116 F.3d 379, 381 (9th Cir. 1997). However, because Respondent does not oppose to the extension, the requested extension is brief and will not impact any other proceedings, and there is no indication that Defendant acted in bad faith, the Court finds that Defendant's failure to meet the deadline is excusable, and further finds good cause to grant Defendant's motion for an extension of time. Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant file his reply on or before June 18, 2018.
Source: Leagle
