Black v. State of Nevada

Opinion

AAARttOorNn eDy. GFeOnRerDa l 2 SABRENA K. CLINTON (Bar No. 6499) Senior Deputy Attorney General 3 KYLE J. HOYT (Bar No. 14886) Senior Deputy Attorney General 4 State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General 5 1 State of Nevada Way, Suite 100 Las Vegas, NV 89119 6 (702) 486-3420 (phone) (702) 486-3773 (fax) 7 sclinton@ag.nv.gov khoyt@ag.nv.gov 8 Attorneys for Defendant, 9 State of Nevada ex rel. Nevada Gaming Control Board 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 13 JAIME BLACK, 14 Case No. 3:24-CV-00414-MMD-CSD Plaintiff, 15 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S vs. UPOPPOSED MOTION FOR 16 ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO STATE OF NEVADA, ex rel. NEVADA RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED 17 GAMING CONTROL BOARD COMPLAINT 18 Defendant(s). (First Request) 19 20 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 21 I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 22 Plaintiff Jamie Black (“Plaintiff” or “Ms. Black”) filed her First Amended Complaint 23 on April 10, 2025. Therein, she made multiple new factual allegations and changes to her 24 previously asserted causes of action. Defendant’s response to the First Amended Complaint 25 is currently due Thursday, April 24, 2025. Undersigned counsel has been diligently working 26 with past and current members of Defendant Nevada Gaming Control Board to investigate 27 these allegations. Additionally, in the two weeks that has passed since the First Amended 28 Complaint, undersigned counsel has been responsible for attending seven (7) previously 2 preparation of three deponents, along with responsibilities in other matters. Defendants do 3 not seek any unmeritorious delay or do so in bad faith. 4 Earlier today, undersigned counsel for Defendant contacted counsel for Plaintiff, 5 who graciously agreed to enter a stipulation for up to ten (10) additional days in which 6 Defendant could respond to the First Amended Complaint. Defendant’s counsel sent a 7 proposed stipulation for a six (6) day extension, however Plaintiff’s counsel was unavailable 8 to review the stipulation and provide authorization for his signature. Defendant’s counsel 9 believes that the instant motion is not opposed based upon those communications. 10 II. ARGUMENT 11 FED. R. CIV. P. 6(b) provides: 12 (1) In General. When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time: 13 14 (A) with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires; or 15 16 (B) on motion made after the time has expired if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect. 17 18 (2) Exceptions. A court must not extend the time to act under Rules 50(b) and (d), 52(b), 59(b), (d) and (e), and 60(b), except as 19 those rules allow. 20 LR 6-1 provides: 21 (a) Every motion requesting a continuance, extension of time, or order shortening time shall be “Filed” by the clerk and processed 22 as an expedited matter. . . . 23 (b) Every motion or stipulation to extend time shall inform the court of any previous extensions granted and state the reasons for the 24 extension requested. . . .Immediately below the title of such motion or stipulation there shall be included a statement indicating 25 whether it is the first, second, third, etc., requested extension. . . . 26 (c) The court may set aside any extension obtained in contravention of this rule. 27 28 / / / opposition or final reply to a motion, or to extend the time fixed for 2 hearing a motion, must state in its opening paragraph the filing date of the motion. 3 4 Rule 6(b)(1) allows for a party to move for an enlargement of time, the determination 5 of which lies with the presiding court. “The Court has inherent power and discretion to 6 control its docket, and the proceedings within the cases on its docket.” Ford v. County of 7 Missoula, Mont., 2010 WL 2674036, 1 (D. Mont., 2010) (citing Landis v. North American 8 Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936); See also FED. R. CIV.P. 6(b) (advisory committee note, 1946) 9 (“Rule 6(b) is a rule of general application giving wide discretion to the court to enlarge 10 these time limits or revive them after they have expired . . .”). 11 Here, good cause exists for an additional six (6) days in order for Defendant to 12 complete its response to the First Amended Complaint as well as to provide some time for 13 client review and approval. As stated above, Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint has 14 differences in her causes of action as well as additional factual allegations which required 15 investigation. At the same time, undersigned counsel was tasked with other matters which 16 included seven (7) depositions in two separate cases in Reno and Las Vegas, and also was 17 required to prepare three of the deponents for their testimony, in addition to other case 18 responsibilities. Moreover, the Complex Litigation is currently understaffed as a Senior 19 Deputy Attorney General is currently on extended leave. Undersigned counsel has worked 20 diligently in responding to the First Amended Complaint, however it could not be completed 21 on time. Thus, Defendant seeks a short extension and not for the purposes of delay and 22 does so in good faith. Defendant has no reason to believe that any additional time will be 23 necessary beyond what is sought in the instant Motion. Finally, Plaintiff appears to have 24 no opposition to the extension and will not be prejudiced by the requested extension. 25 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 CONCLUSION 2 Based upon the foregoing, the Defendants request a six-day extension of time to 3 ||respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, to Wednesday, April 30, 2025. 4 DATED this 24th day of April, 2024. 5 AARON D. FORD 6 Attorney General

7 By: /s/ Kyle Hoyt KYLE J. HOYT (Bar No. 14886) 8 Senior Deputy Attorney General Sabrena K. Clinton (Bar No. 6499) 9 Senior Deputy Attorney General 10 Attorneys for Defendant, State of Nevada ex rel. Nevada Gaming Control Board 12 13 14 15 ORDER 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 Dated: April 25, 2025. ‘9 CS 20 UNITED STATES MAGISTBATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28