ORDER

JAMES C. MAHAN, District Judge.

Presently before the court is plaintiffs' motion to extend time. (ECF No. 85). Defendants have not filed a response, and the time to do so has passed.

On September 28, 2018, defendants RC Willey Financial Services and Richland Holdings, Inc. filed their motion for attorney's fees. (ECF No. 82). Responses to defendants' motion were due by October 12, 2018. Plaintiffs filed their first motion to extend time to file a response to defendants' motion (ECF No. 82) on October 12, 2018. (ECF No. 85). Responses to plaintiffs' motion to extend time were due on October 26, 2018.

Pursuant to Local Rule 7-2(d), the "failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion . . . constitutes a consent to the granting of the motion." LR 7-2(d). Therefore, because defendants have not filed a response to plaintiffs' motion to extend time, and good cause appearing, the court will grant plaintiffs' motion.

However, plaintiffs request "thirty (30) days from the date of the Court's order on this motion" to file their response to defendants' motion. (ECF No. 85 at 9). Because more than thirty (30) days have already elapsed since the filing of their motion, the court will grant plaintiffs only an additional fourteen (14) days from the date of this order to file their response to defendants' motion. Defendants will have seven (7) days thereafter to file a reply.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that plaintiff's motion motion to extend time (ECF No. 85) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of this order to file their response to defendants' motion for attorney's fees (ECF No. 82). Defendants shall have seven (7) days thereafter to file a reply.