STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND RESPONSE DEADLINE

(Second Request Or First Request Following Order On Defendants' Motion To Dismiss)

CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Dario Olivas, by and through his attorney, Travis N. Barrick, Esq., and Defendants State of Nevada, ex rel the Nevada Board of Prison Commissioners; State of Nevada, ex rel the Nevada Department of Corrections; Brian Sandoval; Adam P. Laxalt; Barbara Cegavske; James Cox; Dwight Neven; Anthony Scillia; Isidro Baca; Cole Morrow; Jerry Howell; Jennifer Nash; and Nicholas Galbiso, by and through counsel, Adam Paul Laxalt, Nevada Attorney General, and Jared M. Frost, Senior Deputy Attorney General, of the State of Nevada, Office of the Attorney General, hereby stipulate and agree to an eleven (11) day extension of the deadline to respond to Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint.

On March 5, 2018, Plaintiff filed his Fourth Amended Complaint. ECF No. 48. On May 4, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Fourth Amended Complaint. ECF No. 56. On November 27, 2018, the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 59. Absent an extension, Defendants are required to file an Answer or other response to the Fourth Amended Complaint by December 11, 2018. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(4) (if the Court denies a motion filed under Rule 12, the responsive pleading must be served within 14 days after notice of the Court's action).

The parties here state that there is good cause for an extension. Defendants recently presented a settlement proposal for Plaintiff's consideration and are evaluating a possible interlocutory appeal of the Court's order denying Defendants' qualified immunity arguments. See Knox v. Southwest Airlines, 124 F.3d 1103, 1107 (9th Cir. 1997) ("[W]e have jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity where the appeal focuses on whether the defendants violated a clearly established law given the undisputed facts. . . ."). In the event of either settlement or an appeal, filing a response and triggering the discovery period would not be necessary and would not serve the interests of judicial economy. Therefore, the parties submit that there is good cause to extend Defendants' response deadline for an additional eleven (11) days.

SO ORDERED. Defendants shall have until December 21, 2018, to file a response to Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint.