Attorney General 2 LAURA M. GINN, Bar No. 8085 Deputy Attorney General 3 State of Nevada 100 N. Carson Street 4 Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717 Tel: (775) 684-1120 5 E-mail: [email protected] 6 Attorneys for Defendant Jennifer Nash, Ronald Oliver, 7 and Anthony Herrera 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 DONALD E. MITCHELL, JR., Case No.2:19-cv-00190-GMN-DJA 12 Plaintiff, MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 13 v. TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS 14 J. BORROWMAN, et al., ECF NO. 42 15 Defendants. 16 Defendants, Jennifer Nash, Ronald Oliver, and Anthony Herrera, by and through 17 counsel, Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney General, and Laura M. Ginn, Deputy Attorney 18 General, move for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions 19 (ECF No. 42). 20 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 21 Courts have inherent powers to control their dockets, see Ready Transp., Inc. v. 22 AAR Mfg, Inc.,

(citations omitted), and to “achieve the orderly and 23 expeditious disposition of cases.” Chambers v. NASCO, Inc.,

(1991) “Such 24 power is indispensable to the court’s ability to enforce its orders, manage its docket, and 25 regulate insubordinate [] conduct.

(See also Mazzeo v. Gibbons, No. 2:08–cv01387– 26 RLH–PAL,

, at *2 (D.Nev. 2010)). 27 LR IA 6-1 discusses requests for continuances. 28 /// 2 (a) A motion or stipulation to extend time must state the reasons for the extension requested and must inform the court of all 3 previous extensions of the subject deadline the court granted. (Examples: “This is the first stipulation for extension of time to 4 file motions.” “This is the third motion to extend time to take discovery.”) 5 6 This is the first request and is requested for good cause. Former Senior Deputy 7 Attorney General (SDAG) Brady was responsible for this case and recently left the Office 8 of the Attorney General on September 17, 2021. As a result of former SDAG Brady leaving, 9 this case is being reassigned to Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Alexander Smith. 10 In Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions, he makes ad hominem, offensive, and personal 11 attacks on counsel for the defense. Defendants shall respond and are considering moving 12 for sanctions due to Plaintiff’s filings, especially in light of Plaintiff’s previous filings. 13 Counsel is currently in the process of drafting a response, which will state that after 14 Defendants answered the amended complaint, Williams returned a request for 15 representation, and this was flagged on the Office’s ProLaw database upon review of 16 Mitchell’s motion for sanctions. Thus, the Office is in a position to enter a joinder to the 17 answer on behalf of Brian Williams, which it shall do shortly. John Borrowman still has 18 not returned his request for representation, thus NRS 41.0339(1)(a) prohibits the Office 19 from answering on Borrowman’s behalf. Attorney Smith is attempting to contact 20 Borrowman by telephone and again via email and shall inform the court shortly as to the 21 results of this endeavor. 22 As to Mitchell’s motion for sanctions directed at Attorney Smith, both him and 23 Defendants oppose such a request and contend that this is yet another opportunity for 24 Mitchell to abuse his opponents, which Defendants will address in their response to the 25 motion for sanctions. First, the facts mentioned above in no way suggest any violation of 26 Rule 11(b). Second, Mitchell has failed to comply with the provisions of Rule 11(c)(2), which 27 automatically moots his motion. 28 /// 1 Counsel submits that the recent change of attorney responsible for this case 2 ||constitutes good cause for granting an extension of time to file a response to □□□□□□□□□□□ 3 ||motion. Also, Defendants need further time to look back through Mitchell’s litigation 4 || history to identify any other possible unacceptable and inappropriate conduct of his and, if 5 appropriate, move for sanctions or, at the very least, a warning from the court to cease 6 using abusive and insulting language in his filings. Therefore, Defendants request 7 || additional time to respond to Plaintiff's motion, which will be due on October 7, 2021. 8 DATED this 23rd day of September, 2021. 9 Respectfully submitted, 10 AARON D. FORD u Attorney General By: /s/ Laura M. Ginn 12 LAURA M. GINN (Bar No. 8085) Deputy Attorney General 13 Attorneys for Defendants 14 15 16 17 Good cause appearing therein, IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 19 DATED: September 24, 2021

21 Daniel J. Albregtsj 99 United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28

2 I certify that I am an employee of the State of Nevada, Office of the Attorney General, 3 and that on September 23, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing MOTION FOR 4 EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RULE 11 5 SANCTIONS ECF NO. 42, via this Court’s electronic filing system. Parties who are 6 registered with this Court’s electronic filing system will be served electronically. 7 Donald Mitchell, #94796 High Desert State Prison 8 P.O. Box 650 Indian Springs, Nevada 89070 9 Plaintiff, Pro Se 10 11 /s/ Sheri Regalado Sheri Regalado, an employee of the 12 Office of the Nevada Attorney General 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28