McNair v. Daniels

Opinion

kee MY-SON MCNAIR, Case No. 3:23-CV-00151-ART-CLB Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO EXTEN V. TIME CHARLES DANIELS, et a/., [ECF No. 34] Defendants. Before the Court is Plaintiff My-Son McNair’s (“McNair”) motion for a 45-day extension of time to file a response to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (ECF 11} No. 34.) McNair asserts that an extension of time is necessary because he has limited access to the law library due to his work schedule and the law library is not open on the weekend. (/d.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(A) the court may, for good cause, extend time if a request is made before the original time expires. The good cause inquiry focuses primarily on the movant's diligence. DRK Photo v. McGraw-Hill Global Educ. Holdings, LLC, 870 F.3d 978, 989 (9th Cir. 2017). Having reviewed the motion, the Court finds that good cause exists to warrant granting an extension but finds that a 45-day extension is not warranted and instead will grant a 30-day extension. Accordingly, the motion, (ECF No. 34), is granted in part and denied in part. McNair shall file his response to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment by no later than Monday, February 3, 2025. DATED: January 2, 2025 » UNITED STATES\MAGISTRATE JUDGE