ORDER

C.W. HOFFMAN, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

Presently before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Stay of Proceedings Pending Plaintiff's Interlocutory Appeal Before the Ninth Circuit or, Alternatively, Motion for Third Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 49), filed on January 5, 2016. Plaintiff's deadline to respond to the motion has not yet expired.

Defendants request that the case be stayed pending the outcome Plaintiff's interlocutory appeal of various orders in this case. (See Notice of Appeal (ECF No. 41); Am. Notice of Appeal (ECF No. 47).) Although Defendants cite legal authority indicating the Court has the authority to stay a case for the purpose of judicial economy pending arbitration and indicating that the Court has broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation, Defendants do not provide any legal authority regarding whether it is appropriate to stay a case pending an interlocutory appeal.

Alternatively, Defendants request that the Court extend the dispositive motions deadline, which expired on January 14, 2016, by a minimum of 30 days. Defendants state that there is good cause for the requested extension and excusable neglect for their untimely motion because their counsel recently was hired by the Office of the Attorney General, was assigned to 22 cases in various stages of litigation, was out of town over the holidays on a pre-paid vacation, and is inundated with a large number of court hearings and deadlines in other cases.1

Local Rule 26-4 requires all motions to extend a deadline set forth in a scheduling order to be filed no later than 21 days before the expiration of the subject deadline. Part of the underlying rationale for Local Rule 26-4 is to avoid the situation in which the Court currently finds itself: having to attempt to decide a motion to extend a deadline before there has been time for the opposing party to respond to the motion. Given that Defendants did not file their motion 21 days before the expiration of the dispositive motions deadline, Plaintiff's deadline to respond to the motion, which currently is January 22, 2016, has not yet run.

Given that the dispositive motions deadline has expired, and that Plaintiff has not yet had an opportunity to respond to the motion, the Court temporarily will stay this case pending the Court's order on this motion. During the temporary stay, the Court will require Defendants to file a supplemental brief with legal authority addressing the specific issue of whether a stay pending an interlocutory appeal is appropriate. The Court will provide Plaintiff with additional time to respond to Defendants' motion and supplemental brief. In its order on the motion, the Court will set a new dispositive motions deadline, if necessary.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this case is temporarily stayed pending the Court's decision on Defendants' Motion for Stay of Proceedings Pending Plaintiff's Interlocutory Appeal Before the Ninth Circuit or, Alternatively, Motion for Third Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 49).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants must file a supplemental brief on the specific issue of whether a stay pending an interlocutory appeal is appropriate by January 26, 2016.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff must respond to Defendants' Motion for Stay of Proceedings Pending Plaintiff's Interlocutory Appeal Before the Ninth Circuit or, Alternatively, Motion for Third Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 49) and Defendants' supplemental brief by February 12, 2016.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants may file a reply in support of their motion by February 22, 2016.