Saucedo v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

Opinion

VALERIANO SAUCEDO, Case No. 1:22-cv-01584-HBK Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S EX PARTE MOTION FOR v. AN ENLARGEMENT OF TIME

EXPERIAN INFORMATION FEBRUARY 6, 2023 DEADLINE SOLUTIONS, INC., (Doc. No. 5) Defendant. Defendant Experian Information Solutions filed an ex parte application to extend time to respond to Complaint on January 4, 2023. (Doc. No. 5). Plaintiff filed a response in opposition that same day. (Doc. No. 6). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) provides for extending deadlines for good cause shown, if the request to extend time is made before the original time, or its extension expires; or, on a motion made after the time has expired, if the party failed to act because of excusable neglect. Plaintiff timely filed the instant motion and has shown good cause for the extension of time. Notably, a review of the docket reveals Plaintiff filed the Complaint on December 8, 2022, and Defendants received service of process on December 19, 2022. (Doc. No. 4). There were two recognized, intervening federal holidays following the date of service of process. This case is a class action, which by their nature are deemed complex civil actions. Despite Plaintiff not stipulating to the proposed 30-day extension, the Court encourages “civility and mutual respect among members of the bar that ought to encourage attorney consent to one another’s reasonable, nonprejudicial, good faith extension requests.” Federal Civil Rules Handbook, Rule 6(b) at 327-328 (2023) (citing Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1263 (9th Cir. 2010). Defendant fails to explain how a 30-day extension of time is unreasonable, prejudicial or not made in good faith. Further, this Court’s Local Rules recognize that the parties may stipulate to a 28-day extension of time without court approval. Local Rule 144(a)(E.D. Cal. 2022). Thus, the Court finds good cause to grant Defendant the twenty-eight day extension of time already deemed reasonable by this Court. Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 1. Defendant’s motion for an extension of time (Doc. No. 5) is GRANTED in part. 2. Defendant shall file a response to the Complaint no later than February 6, 2023, absent further motion and good cause shown. Dated: _ January 9, 2023 law ZA. foareh Zackte HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE