Fowler v. Daniels

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: April 17, 2023
• Docket: 3:22-cv-00195
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 AARON D. FORD Attorney General 2 CHRIS DAVIS (Bar No. 6616) Senior Deputy Attorney General 3 State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General 4 555 E. Washington Ave., Ste. 3900 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 5 (702) 486- 9252 (phone) (702) 486-3773 (fax) 6 Email: cwdavis@ag.nv.gov 7 Attorneys for Defendants Charles Daniels, Kara LeGrand, Dana Marks, and Michael Minev 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 12 SKYLER JAMES FOWLER, Case No. 3:22-cv-00195-MMD-CLB 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO . EXTEND THE TIME TO RESPOND 15 TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF AMEND 16 CORRECTIONS, et al., (ECF No. 86 ) 17 (FIRST REQUEST) Defendants. 18 19 Defendants Charles Daniels, former Director for the Nevada Department of 20 Corrections (NDOC), Officer Kara LeGrand, Dr. Dana Marks, and Dr. Michael Minev, by 21 and through counsel, Aaron D. Ford, Attorney General of the State of Nevada, and Chris 22 Davis, Senior Deputy Attorney General, hereby move, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b) and 23 16(b)(4) and Local Rules IA 6-1 and LR 26-3, to extend the time to respond to Plaintiff’s 24 motion for leave to file a third amended complaint (ECF No. 86) by thirty (30) days, until 25 Friday, May 17, 2023. This motion is brought based on the following Points and 26 Authorities, the good cause set forth in the Declaration of Chris Davis, Esq., and the 27 pleadings and papers filed in this matter. . . . 1 DECLARATION OF CHRIS DAVIS, ESQ. 2 I, Chris Davis, declare under penalty of perjury that the following is true and correct 3 of my own personal knowledge and if called to testify in this matter would testify as follows: 4 1. I am a Senior Deputy Attorney assigned to represent the above Defendants 5 in this matter. 6 2. Counsel for Defendant has diligently attempted to complete Defendants ’ 7 opposition to motion to amend prior to the April 17, 2022 deadline, but has been unable to 8 do so. A Deputy Solicitor General resigned, who was representing the Nevada Department 9 of Corrections (NDOC) on appeal. Additionally, two Deputy Attorney Generals have 10 resigned, and replacements have not yet been found. Counsel has now been assigned all of 11 the NDOC appeals and many of the cases of the two departing Deputy Attorney Generals. 12 3. In the last two (2) month, counsel has drafted one (1) motion for summary 13 judgment, one (1) opposition to motion for injunctive relief, three (3) motions to dismiss, 14 four (4) appellate briefs, as well as replies in support of motions and responses to numerous 15 discovery requests. 16 4. With this increased caseload, Counsel has not been able devote the time 17 necessary to oppose Plaintiff’s third attempt to amend his complaint in this case, despite 18 working extended hours. 19 5. Plaintiff has sought leave to amend for the third time, despite the fact that 20 this Court has not yet ruled on Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s second amended 21 complaint based on Plaintiff’s failure to follow the Court’s express instructions on the 22 requirements for filing a second amendment complaint. 23 5. Plaintiff has also twice moved for injunctive relief, only to withdraw those 24 motion after Counsel for Defendants expended significant amount of time opposing the 25 motions. 26 6. Counsel for Defendants has therefore had to expend numerous hours 27 addressing matters in this case only to have Plaintiff effectively concede that his filings 1 either lacked merit or needed to be refiled. This multiplying of proceedings has only added 2 to counsel’s extensive workload. 3 7. Based on the forgoing, and due to the substantially increased nature of 4 counsel for Defendants’ workload, good cause is present to grant an extension of thirty (30) 5 days, until Wednesday, May 17, 2023, to respond to Plaintiff’s motion to amend. 6 DATED this 17th day of April, 2023. 7 AARON D. FORD Attorney General 8 9 By: /s/ Chris Davis CHRIS DAVIS 10 11 12 I. POINTS AND AUTHORITY 13 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b), the “court may, for good cause, extend the time . . . 14 with or without motion or notice . . . if a request is made, before the original time or its 15 extension expires.” Defendants seek a first extension to respond to Plaintiff’s motion to 16 amend his complaint for the third time, which is set for today, April 17, 2023. Good cause 17 is present to grant an extension of thirty (30) days to file a response. 18 Counsel for Defendants has diligently attempted to timely complete their opposition 19 to Plaintiff’s motion to amend, but has simply been unable to do so, despite working long 20 hours, due to the substantial nature of his workload, the unexpected departure of the 21 Deputy Solicitor General and two Deputy Attorney General in the NDOC unit, resulting in 22 all NDOC appeals being assigned to counsel, along with many of the cases of the two 23 departing Deputy Attorney Generals. Only the perfect storm of the almost three 24 simultaneous departures has prevented counsel from timely opposing Plaintiff’s motion to 25 amend. 26 Moreover, Plaintiff has multiplied these proceedings by filing complaints that he 27 then seeks leave to amend once tested by a motion dismiss, and by filing motions for injunctive relief that he withdraws after Counsel for Defendants has expended numerous 1 |/hours opposing. Plaintiff's tactic of presenting a moving target has only increased 2 || Counsel’s substantial caseload. 3 Additionally, Plaintiff should not be prejudiced by this short delay. Plaintiff has 4 || already voluntarily withdrawn his motion for injunctive relief (see ECF No. 83), for the 5 second time, admitting he is receiving the treatment he seeks. Accordingly, Defendants 6 || respectfully request that the extension be granted for good cause. See Ahanchian v. Xenon 7 || Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 12538, 1260, (9th Cir. 2010) (holding that the “district court abused 8 ||its discretion in denying party’s timely motion” to extend time because the party 9 || “demonstrated the ‘good cause’ required by Rule 6, and because there was no reason to 10 || believe that [the party] was acting in bad faith or was misrepresenting his reasons for 11 || asking for the extension’). 12 II. CONCLUSION 13 For the forgoing reasons, and for good cause appearing, the Defendants respectfully 14 || request to extend the time to respond to Plaintiffs motion to extend the time to respond to 15 || Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a third amended complaint (ECF No. 86) by thirty (80) 16 || days, until Wednesday, May 17, 2023. 17 Respectfully submitted this 17th day of February 20238. 18 AARON D. FORD Attorney General By: __/s/ Chris Davis 20 Chris Davis Senior Deputy Attorney General Attorney for Defendants 22 23 24 IT ISSO ORDERED. ‘ 25 DATED: April 17, 2023. wl 27 28