Carroll v. Toele

S.D. California

Carroll v. Toele

DecidedFebruary 11, 2021

Docket3:20-cv-00079

StatusUnknown

This text of Carroll v. Toele (Carroll v. Toele) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carroll v. Toele, (S.D. Cal. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TREMAYNE CARROLL, Case No.: 3:20-cv-00079-BAS-RBM

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR 13 vs. EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 14 C/O TOELE, et al., (ECF No. 25) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Pending before the Court is a Request for Extension of Time to File a Third 18 Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 25.) This civil rights action was originally filed by 19 Plaintiff pro se. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff has since retained counsel, who filed his Notice of 20 Appearance on December 3, 2020. (ECF No. 23.) The Court previously granted counsel 21 until January 25, 2021, to file a Third Amended Complaint on Plaintiff’s behalf. (ECF No. 22 24.) 23 On January 25, 2021, Plaintiff’s counsel requested an additional thirty-days in which 24 to comply with the Court’s deadline. Counsel attests that he has not had adequate time to 25 consult with Mr. Carroll or to perform an independent fact investigation with respect to his 26 claims. (ECF No. 25 at 1.) Counsel requests a short extension in which to determine 27 whether certain claims against Defendants other than Toele should be included in the Third 28 Amended Complaint. (Id.) 1 Pursuant to Rule 6(b)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may 2 grant an extension of time for “good cause” if the moving party requests the extension 3 before the applicable deadline expires. It is within the court’s discretion to determine 4 whether to grant an extension under the circumstances. See Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, 5 Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1255 (9th Cir. 2010) (noting the district court’s wide discretion to 6 extend time under Rule 6(b) in the context of case management and its obligation “to secure 7 the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action” (citation and internal 8 quotation marks omitted)); accord Turner v. Tierney, 678 F. App’x 580, 581 (9th Cir. 9 2017). 10 Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Request for Extension of 11 Time (ECF No. 25) and DIRECTS counsel to file a Third Amended Complaint on or 12 before March 24, 2021.1 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: February 11, 2021 _________________________________ Hon. Cynthia Bashant 16 United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 While Plaintiff is now represented by counsel, he still proceeds in forma pauperis 26 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (See ECF No. 8.) Therefore, should counsel seek the 27 assistance of the U.S. Marshal in effecting service upon the Defendants named as parties in Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint, he must include a request for that service pursuant 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TREMAYNE CARROLL, Case No.: 3:20-cv-00079-BAS-RBM

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR 13 vs. EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT 14 C/O TOELE, et al., (ECF No. 25) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Pending before the Court is a Request for Extension of Time to File a Third 18 Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 25.) This civil rights action was originally filed by 19 Plaintiff pro se. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff has since retained counsel, who filed his Notice of 20 Appearance on December 3, 2020. (ECF No. 23.) The Court previously granted counsel 21 until January 25, 2021, to file a Third Amended Complaint on Plaintiff’s behalf. (ECF No. 22 24.) 23 On January 25, 2021, Plaintiff’s counsel requested an additional thirty-days in which 24 to comply with the Court’s deadline. Counsel attests that he has not had adequate time to 25 consult with Mr. Carroll or to perform an independent fact investigation with respect to his 26 claims. (ECF No. 25 at 1.) Counsel requests a short extension in which to determine 27 whether certain claims against Defendants other than Toele should be included in the Third 28 Amended Complaint. (Id.) 1 Pursuant to Rule 6(b)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may 2 grant an extension of time for “good cause” if the moving party requests the extension 3 before the applicable deadline expires. It is within the court’s discretion to determine 4 whether to grant an extension under the circumstances. See Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, 5 Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1255 (9th Cir. 2010) (noting the district court’s wide discretion to 6 extend time under Rule 6(b) in the context of case management and its obligation “to secure 7 the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action” (citation and internal 8 quotation marks omitted)); accord Turner v. Tierney, 678 F. App’x 580, 581 (9th Cir. 9 2017). 10 Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Request for Extension of 11 Time (ECF No. 25) and DIRECTS counsel to file a Third Amended Complaint on or 12 before March 24, 2021.1 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: February 11, 2021 _________________________________ Hon. Cynthia Bashant 16 United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 While Plaintiff is now represented by counsel, he still proceeds in forma pauperis 26 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). (See ECF No. 8.) Therefore, should counsel seek the 27 assistance of the U.S. Marshal in effecting service upon the Defendants named as parties in Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint, he must include a request for that service pursuant 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Carroll v. Toele, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carroll-v-toele-casd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack