Jenkins v. Simas

Opinion

1 LAWRENCE & LAWRENCE LAW, PLLC Nathan E. Lawrence, NBN 15060 2 || Joseph P. Lawrence, NBN 16726 3 9480 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. 213 Las Vegas, Nevada 89123 4 || Telephone: 702-534-6556 5 || Facsimile: 702-602-5168 nathan@law2esq.com 6 joseph@law2esq.com 7 TRAVIS N. BARRICK, PC Travis N. Barrick, NBN 9257 730 Las Vegas Blvd S., Ste. 104 2 1 || Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Telephone: 702-892-3500 = |! Facsimile: 702-386-1946 & 42 || tbarrick@vegascase.com g Attorneys for Plaintiff 13

eg UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 16 £ DAYSEAN JENKINS Case No.: 3:23-cv-00049-ART-CLB — 217 Se Plaintiff, 9 y ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PLAINTIFF’S 20 || DANIEL SIMAS, an individual; JOSEPH RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT DR. 31 || BENSON, an individual; MIKE DAVIS, an JOHN HALKI’S MOTION TO individual; JOHN HALKI, an individual; and | DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S SECOND 22 || DEBBIE KEENNON, an individual; AMENDED COMPLAINT collectively, 23 24 Defendants. [ECE No. 29]

25 (First Request) 26 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) and Local Rules JA 6-1, IA 6-2, and 26-3, Plaintiff 27 |} DAYSEAN JENKINS (“Plaintiff or “Mr. Jenkins”), by and through his attorneys of the law 28 || firms of LAWRENCE & LAWRENCE LAW, PLLC and TRAVIS N. BARRICK, PC and Defendant Dr.

C 1 Page | of 4

1 |} JOHN HALKI (“Dr. Halki”), by and through his attorneys of the law firm of LEWIS BRISBOIS 2 || BISGAARD & SMITH LLP, hereby submit this Stipulation and Order to Extend Time for Plaintiff's 3 ||Response to Defendant Dr. John Halki’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended 4 || Complaint. 5 This is the first stipulation to extend the response deadline, and this stipulation is presented 6 || to the Court in advance of the current deadline of December 20, 2024. For the foregoing reasons 7 as is more fully explicated below, the Parties stipulate to and respectfully request that this 8 || Court extend the response deadline in this matter until January 3, 2025. 9 10 |} 1. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY 11 1. On November 23, 2024, pursuant to the Court’s August 12, 2024, Order extending = 12 || the deadline to amend pleadings and add parties, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint, 13 |}adding new causes of action for deliberate indifference arising from violations of Article 1, = 14 || Section 6 of the Nevada Constitution. = 15 2. On December 6, 2024, Defendant Dr. Halki filed his Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's 2 16 ||Second Amended Complaint (the “Motion to Dismiss”), specifically with respect to the Nevada = 17 || Constitutional claims. < 18 19 LEGAL STANDARD 20 Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule (“FRCP”) 6(b)(1) governs extensions of time and allows, in relevant 21 || part, that “[w]hen an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good 22 || cause, extend the time: (A) with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is 23 || made, before the original time or its extension expires.” If additional time for any purpose is 24 ||needed, the proper procedure is to present a request for extension of time before the time fixed 25 ||has expired. Canup v. Mississippi Val. Barge Line Co., 31 F.R.D. 282 (W.D. Pa. 1962). An 26 || extension of time may always be sought and is usually granted on a showing of good cause if 27 || timely made under subdivision (b)(1) of [FRCP 6]. Creedon v. Taubman, 8 F.R.D. 268 (N.D. 28 Ohio 1947). Also, a district court possesses the inherent power to control its own docket. | AW

| Page 2 of 4

1 || Hamilton Copper & Steel Corp. v. Primary Steel, Inc., 898 F.2d 1428, 1429 (9th Cir. 1990); 2 || Olivia v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 272, 273 (9th Cir. 1992). 3 LR IA 6-1 additionally requires that a motion to extend time must state the reasons for the 4 || extension requested. LR 26-3 requires that a motion to extend any date set by the discovery plan, 5 ||scheduling order, or other order must, as well as satisfying the requirements of LR IA 6-1, 6 || demonstrate good cause for the extension. 7 8 ||}. ARGUMENT 9 As noted above, Dr. Halki’s Motion to Dismiss was filed on December 6, 2024, and 10 || Plaintiff's Response thereto is required, in the normal course of things, by Friday, December 20, 11 2024. Accordingly, under FRCP 6.1(b)(1), the instant Stipulation for extension of time is timely = 12 || filed with respect to the upcoming response deadline. 13 Unfortunately, Plaintiff's lead counsel, Mr. Lawrence, has a previously and long- = 14 || scheduled trip out of country, from December 10, 2024, to December 20, 2024, which will render = 15 timely response to the Motion to Dismiss impracticable, if not impossible. The Parties stipulate 2 16 || that this previously scheduled international trip constitutes good cause for a brief extension of = 17 || time for Plaintiff's response. Given the Christmas holiday in the week following the present < 18 || response deadline, the Parties are amenable to and request approval by the Court of an extension 19 || for Plaintiff's Response to Dr. Halki’s Motion to Dismiss of two weeks, until January 3, 2025. 20 21 |f/// 22 23 |V/// 24 25 |}/// 26 27 |V/// 28

= | Page 3 of 4

1 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 2 || DATED this 8" day of December 2024. DATED this 8 day of September 2024. 3 LAWRENCE & LAW E LAW, PLLC LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP 4 5 /s/ Frank A. Toddre, I] _ © || Nathan E-bawr ce, NBN 15060 Frank A. Toddre, II, NBN 11474 7 || Joseph P. Lawrence, NBN 16726 Frank.Toddre@lewisbrisbois.com 9480 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. 213 6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600 8 Las Vegas, Nevada 89123 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118 Telephone: 702-534-6556 Telephone: 702.893.3383 10 Facsimile: 702-602-5168 Facsimile: 702.893.3789 nathan@law2esq.com Attorney for Defendant Dr. John Halki . = 11 |] joseph@law2esq.com 12 || Attorneys for Plaintiff oO 2 3 3 OQ ow 14

op

16 IT IS SO ORDERED. =~ 17 Se DATED: __ December 9, 2024 19 * 20 21 UNITED STATES GISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1 Page 4 of 4