Ruiz v. Nevada Department of Corrections

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided August 24, 2020·No. 2:18-cv-00091·Unknown

Opinion

Nevada Attorney General 2 CHARLES D HOPPER (Bar No. 6346) Deputy Attorney General 3 State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General 4 555 E. Washington Ave., Ste. 3900 Las Vegas, NV 89101 5 Telephone: (702) 486-3655 Facsimile: (702) 486-3773 6 E-Mail: cdhopper@ag.nv.gov Attorneys for Defendants 7 Tara Carpenter, David Carpenter, Dr. John Scott, 8 Adrian Garcia, Robert LeGrand & Quentin Byrne 9 10 11 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 14 JOHN MANUEL RUIZ, CASE NO. 2:18-cv-00091-RFB-EJY 15 Plaintiff, 16 v. MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COURT ORDER RE 17 NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF SUGGESTION OF DEATH AND CORRECTIONS, et al., ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE 18 (ECF NO. 80) Defendants. 19 20 21 Defendants Tara Carpenter, David Carpenter, Dr. John Scott, Adrian Garcia, Robert 22 LeGrand and Quentin Byrne, by and through counsel, Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney 23 General, and Charles D Hopper, Deputy Attorney General, hereby file their Motion for 24 Extension of Time to Respond to Court Order re Suggestion of Death and Acceptance of 25 Service. 26 I. INTRODUCTION 27 This is an inmate Civil Rights lawsuit. Plaintiff John Manuel Ruiz (Ruiz) filed his 28 First Amended Complaint (FAC) on August 23, 2018. (ECF No. 12). 2 on one claim of sexual assault against Defendant Fredericks; one claim of failure to protect 3 against Defendants Chacon, D. Carpenter, Simms, Kerri and R. Garcia; one claim of 4 retaliation against Defendants Chacon, D. Carpenter, Simms, LeGrand, T. Carpenter, 5 Byrne, Rosas and Garcia; one claim of due process in disciplinary hearings against 6 Defendants D. Carpenter and Simms; one claim of deliberate indifference to serious 7 medical needs against Defendant Scott; and one claim of deprivation of property against 8 Defendant Rosas. (ECF No. 13 at 15-16). 9 On August 7, 2020, this Court entered an Order wherein it ordered Defendants to 10 refile their suggestion of death and to file a notice with the Court stating whether 11 Defendants will accept service of process for Celia Chacon within fifteen (15) days of the 12 date of the Order, which would result in a due date of August 24, 2020. (ECF No. 80). 13 II. APPLICABLE LAW 14 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1) governs extensions of time and provides as 15 follows: 16 When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time: (A) with or without 17 motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires; or (B) on motion made 18 after the time has expired if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect. 19 20 Any request to change deadlines established in the scheduling order must be 21 supported by a showing of good cause pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 16(b)(4), which turns 22 primarily on a showing that the deadlines currently in place could not reasonably be met 23 despite the diligent of the movant. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 24 609 (9th Cir. 1992). 25 III. ARGUMENT 26 Ruiz respectfully requests a twenty-one (21) day extension of time to respond to the 27 Court Order regarding suggestion of death and notice regarding acceptance of service. 28 Defense counsel has been unavailable due to medical issues and is now transferring 1 || divisions within the Attorney General’s office. The requested extension would allow for the 2 ||new Deputy Attorney General assigned to this case to have enough time to familiarize 3 || him/herself with the case and catch up. If the Court grants the twenty-one (21) days 4 ||}extension, the suggestion of death and notice of acceptance of service would be due 5 |}September 14, 2020. Accordingly, Ruiz respectfully requests a twenty-one (21) day 6 || extension of time to refile the suggestion of death and to file a notice regarding acceptance 7 || of service. 8 IV. CONCLUSION 9 For the foregoing reasons, Ruiz respectfully requests a twenty-one (21) day extension 10 || of time to refile the suggestion of death and to file a notice regarding acceptance of service. 11 DATED this 24th day of August, 2020. 12 AARON D. FORD Attorney General 13 14 By:_/s/ Charles D Hopper Charles D Hopper (Bar. No. 6346) 15 Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendants 16 Tara Carpenter, David Carpenter, Dr. John Scott, 17 Adrian Garcia, Robert LeGrand & Quentin Byrne 18 19 ORDER 20 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to 21 Court Order Re Suggestion of Death and Acceptance of Service (ECF No. 83) is GRANTED. 22 23 IT |S FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall have up to and including September 14, 2020 to refile the suggestion of death and to file a notice with the Court regarding 24 acceptance of service for Celia Chacon. 25 26 - UNITED)/STATES’ MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 98 Dated: August 24, 2020

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

Ruiz v. Nevada Department of Corrections, (D. Nev. 2020).

Ruiz v. Nevada Department of Corrections (Ruiz v. Nevada Department of Corrections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related