ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME

ROBERT S. LASNIK, District Judge.

Currently pending before the Court are three motions to dismiss. Dkt. # 53, # 54, and # 55. On the day the motions were noted for consideration, plaintiff filed a motion for an extension of time in which to respond. Dkt. # 61. Plaintiff is pursuing this litigation pro se and has been struggling to keep up with the motions, amendments, and dismissals that have occurred in this case. She missed the deadline for filing her responses and explains that "the trials of working as a lone-Pro Se complainant come forth as mental miscues of forgotten or missed execution dates. . . ." Dkt. # 61 at 5.

The Court is cognizant of the challenges of pursuing federal litigation without any legal training or familiarity with the procedures that govern this proceeding. It also has a strong preference for resolving issues on the merits, rather than on calendaring errors. A brief extension of time in which to file responses to the pending motions is therefore warranted. Plaintiff is reminded, however, that she chose to initiate this lawsuit and has accused defendants of various wrongs, causing them to incur fees and subjecting them to great uncertainty and potential distress. If she has a viable claim, she must move forward in proving it expeditiously.

For all of the foregoing reasons, plaintiff's motion (Dkt. # 61) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to renote defendants' motions to dismiss (Dkt. # 53, # 54, and # 55) on the Court's calendar for Friday, October 26, 2018. Plaintiff's responses are due on or before Monday, October 22, 2018. No further extensions of time to respond will be granted.