1 AARON D. FORD 2 Attorney General PETER E. DUNKLEY Bar No. 11110 3 Deputy Attorney General State of Nevada 4 Public Safety Division 100 N. Carson Street 5 Carson City, NV 89701-4717 Tel: (775) 684-1259 6 E-mail: [email protected] 7 Attorneys for Defendants Ira Brannon and Christopher Smith 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 JOSEPH L. MIZZONI, Case No. 3:15-cv-00499-MMD-WGC 12 Plaintiff, 13 vs. ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF 14 STATE OF NEVADA, et al., TIME TO FILE JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR 15 Defendants. DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 16 Defendants Ira Brannon and Christopher Smith, by and through counsel, Aaron D. 17 Ford, Attorney General of the State of Nevada, and Peter E. Dunkley, Deputy Attorney 18 General, file this unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Joint Stipulation and 19 Order for Dismissal With Prejudice. 20 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 21 I. RELEVANT BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 22 Following a mediation with Magistrate Judge William Cobb, the parties agreed to settlement 23 terms. See ECF No. 167. Pursuant to the Court’s order, the stipulation of dismissal with prejudice is 24 to be filed no later than September 28, 2020. See id. The parties have exchanged settlement documents 25 and are still collaboratively working on obtaining the necessary signatures on both the settlement 26 documents. The parties believe they will obtain the necessary signatures within the next 30 days, or by 27 October 28, 2020. Plaintiff has confirmed that this motion is unopposed. 28 / / / 1 II. ARGUMENT 2 Courts have inherent power to control their dockets. Hamilton Copper & Steel Corp. v. Primary 3 Steel, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1990); Oliva v. Sullivan,

(9th Cir. 1992). 4 Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) governs enlargements of time and provides as follows: 5 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 motion or notice if the court 6 acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires; or (B) on motion made after the time has expired if the party failed to act 7 because of excusable neglect. 8 “The proper procedure, when additional time for any purpose is needed, is to present to the Court a 9 timely request for an extension before the time fixed has expired (i.e., a request presented before the 10 time then fixed for the purpose in question has expired).” Canup v. Miss. Valley Barge Line Co., 31

, 283 (D.Pa. 1962). The Canup Court explained that “the practicalities of life” often 12 necessitate an enlargement of time to comply with a court deadline.

Extensions of time “usually are 13 granted upon a showing of good cause, if timely made.” Creedon v. Taubman,

, 269 14 (D.Ohio 1947). The good cause standard considers a party’s diligence in seeking the continuance or 15 extension. See, e.g., Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1992). 16 In this case, the parties have been working on finalizing the settlement documents and obtaining 17 the necessary signatures. Final versions of the documents have been circulated and are awaiting 18 execution. Counsel for Defendants has confirmed that this motion is unopposed. 19 Thus, good cause exists for the Court to grant a [30] day extension in order to permit time for 20 the settlement documents to be executed and the Stipulation and Order of Dismissal to be submitted to 21 the Court, which will fully resolve this case. 22 / / / 23 / / / 24 / / / 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / 1 III. CONCLUSION 2 For the above stated reasons, Defendants request October 28, 2020 to file the Joint Stipulation 3 and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice. This request is unopposed. 4 DATED this 28th day of September, 2020. 5 AARON D. FORD Attorney General 6 7 By: /s/ Peter E. Dunkley PETER E. DUNKLEY, Bar No. 11110 8 Deputy Attorney General 9 Attorneys for Defendants 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 13 U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14 DATED: September 29, 2020 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28