ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIMETO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING

(Doc. 15)

JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.

S. Zarris, J. Foster, P. Perez, R. Ruiz, B. Morse and R. Ruvalcaba have applied ex parte for a three-week extension of time in which to file their responsive pleading to the first amended complaint. (Doc. 15) The plaintiff refused to stipulate to the extension because the defendants refused to provide early discovery and because the defendants' lawyer failed to adequately explain why she had not had sufficient communications earlier such to verify they wished representation. (Doc. 19)

The plaintiff does not explain how refusing to agree to the extension of time advances his cause in any fashion. It did not speed up the start of discovery. Seemingly, all it did was to require opposing counsel to seek relief and require the Court to drop other, more substantive work to devote its attention to this matter. Then when the Court did this, the plaintiff failed to respond as ordered.1 Thus, the Court ORDERS:

1. Defendants' request for an extension of time to file a responsive pleading to the first amended complaint is GRANTED;

2. Defendants SHALL file their responsive pleading no later than April 10, 2018;

3. The order to show cause (Doc. 17) is DISCHARGED.

In future, counsel SHALL work diligently and cooperatively. They SHALL file only properly noticed motions after meeting an conferring and they SHALL timely respond to motions and the Court's order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.