Janae Huteson and Alyssa Vernon v. United States Postal Service, et al.

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: June 9, 2026
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02590
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 TAOctDinDg ABtLtoArnNeCy HGEe neral of the United States 2 SIGAL CHATTAH First Assistant United States Attorney 3 District of Nevada Nevada Bar Number 8264 4 EDNIN MARTINEZ 5 Assistant United States Attorney 501 Las Vegas Blvd. So., Suite 1100 6 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Phone: (702) 388-6336 7 Fax: (702) 388-6787 ednin.martinez@usdoj.gov 8 Attorneys for the Federal Defendants 9

10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 Janae Huteson and Alyssa Vernon, Case No. 2:25-cv-02590-GMN-MDC 12 Plaintiffs, Federal Defendants’ UNOPPOSED 13 Motion for Retroactive Extension of v. Time to File a Response to Plaintiffs’ 14 Complaint (ECF No. 1) United States Postal Service, et al. 15 FIRST REQUEST Defendants. 16 17 Federal Defendants, by and through undersigned counsel, move this Court for a 30- 18 day extension of time from June 4, 2026, up to and including July 6, 20261, in which to file 19 a response to Plaintiffs’ Complaint (ECF No. 1). Undersigned AUSA has several competing 20 deadlines, and needs additional time to review Plaintiffs’ file, to identify whether additional 21 information is needed, to coordinate with the agency, and to prepare a response. 22 On June 4, 2026, the parties conferred, and Plaintiff’s counsel agrees to a 30-day 23 extension from June 4, 2026. This is Federal Defendants’ first request for an extension of 24 time to respond to Plaintiffs’ Complaint. This request is made in good faith and not for the 25 purpose of any undue delay. 26 27 28 1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities 2 On December 23, 2025, Plaintiffs filed their complaint. ECF No. 1. On February 3 17, 2026, Plaintiffs served Federal Defendants with summons and Complaint. ECF No. 7. 4 Federal Defendants’ original deadline to respond to the complaint was April 18, 2026. See 5 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(2). However, Federal Defendants inadvertently missed the deadline 6 to Answer as the undersigned was recently assigned to this case. Additional time is 7 necessary for the Federal Defendants to prepare a response to the complaint because 8 undersigned AUSA has several competing deadlines, and needs additional time to review 9 Plaintiffs’ file, to identify whether additional information is needed, to coordinate with the 10 agency, and to prepare a response. 11 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(B), the Court may extend a deadline 12 “on motion made after the time has expired if the party failed to act because of excusable 13 neglect.” The Ninth Circuit applies the following four-factor equitable test to determine 14 whether a party's failure to meet a deadline constitutes “excusable neglect:” (1) the danger of 15 prejudice to the opposing party; (2) the length of the delay and its potential impact on the 16 proceedings; (3) the reason for the delay; and (4) whether the movant acted in good faith. 17 Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1261 (9th Cir. 2010). This inquiry is 18 equitable and requires consideration of all relevant circumstances. Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. 19 Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship, 507 U.S. 380, 395 (1993). Even where the reason for delay is 20 imperfect, excusable neglect may be found when the delay is minimal, non-prejudicial, and 21 not undertaken in bad faith. See Bateman v. U.S. Postal Serv., 231 F.3d 1220, 1224–25 (9th 22 Cir. 2000). 23 First, Plaintiffs are willing to consent to this requested extension. Second, the length 24 of delay is not excessive, and the proceedings will not be significantly impacted because 25 discovery has not begun. Third, the reason for the delay was unintentional oversight in the 26 case assignment process. The Civil Division of the United States Attorney’s Office for the 27 District of Nevada has been operating at approximately fifty percent capacity for several months and has been significantly preoccupied with a heavy habeas caseload. Under these 2 || circumstances, assignment was regrettably but unintentionally delayed. Fourth, upon 3 || discovery of the lapsed deadline, undersigned AUSA acted quickly and reached out to 4]|| Plaintiffs’ counsel, which supports a finding of diligence and good faith. For these reasons, and Plaintiffs’ consent, Federal Defendants submit that a finding of excusable neglect is 6 || appliable here. 7 Undersigned counsel is diligently in seeking information from USPS regarding the 8 || claims and allegations in Plaintiff's complaint. However, because of several other competin: deadlines, undersigned AUSA will need more time to obtain and review the information available, to coordinate with USPS counsel, and to prepare a response to the complaint. 11 }| Without such additional time, a proper response to the complaint cannot be prepared. For 12 || these reasons, Federal Respondents respectfully request a 30-day extension from June 4, 13 || 2024, to July 6, 20267, to prepare a response to Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 14 If this unopposed motion for a retroactive extension of time is granted, the new 15 || deadline to respond to Plaintiffs’ Complaint will be July 6, 2026. Given Federal 16 || Defendants’ excusable neglect, good faith, and diligence, and Plaintiffs’ lack of opposition, good cause exists for the 30-day extension. Federal Defendants, therefore, respectfully 18 || request that the Court grant this motion. 19 Respectfully submitted this 5" day of June 2026. 20 TODD BLANCHE 21 Acting U.S. Attorney General SIGAL CHATTAH 22 First Assistant United States Attorney 23 /s/Ednin Martinez EDNIN MARTINEZ 94 Assistant United States Attorney IT IS SO ORDERED: 26 Jp SY) H log axi wif o B. Couvillier, III 27 #NITED § YES MAGISTRATE JUDGE July 4, 2026, is a Saturday. DATED: che 9, 2026