Cohen v. Social Security

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA LARRY NEIL C., Case No. 2:24-cv-01367-JCM-NJK 9 Plaintiff(s), ORDER v. [Docket No. 15] MARTIN O’MALLEY, 12 Defendant(s).

13 Pending before the Court is an unopposed motion to extend time for Plaintiff to file his opening brief. Docket No. 15.

15 Plaintiff seeks a lengthy 47-day extension premised on an assertion that counsel’s office is overloaded with work. See id. at 1-2. Overloading oneself is not good cause for an extension; it is cause for alarm. See, e.g., Olesczuk v. Citizens One Home Loans, 2016 U.S. Dist. Lexis 153342, at *6 n.3 (D. Nev. Nov. 4, 2016) (citing Greene v. Alhambra Hosp. Med. Ctr., 2015 U.S. Dist. Lexis 72697, at *3 (D. Nev. June 3, 2015)). Law firms deciding to engage in voluminous litigation efforts must ensure they have made the proper preparations and staffing decisions to meet their professional obligations in each of those cases. See, e.g., Carisbrook Asset Holding Trust v. SFR Invs. Pool 1, LLC, 2019 WL 2393614, at *3 n.2 (D. Nev. June 6, 2019). Making matters worse in the circumstances of this case, the above obligations have already been explained to the same law firm representing Plaintiff, but counsel is effectively making the exact same arguments that were previously rejected. See James B. v. Kijakazi, Case No. 2:23-cv-00350-JCM-NJK, Docket No. 15 (D. Nev. June 1, 2023) (providing a “one-time” courtesy extension despite the lack of good cause (emphasis in original)). ] As a final courtesy to counsel and the staff at Olinsky Law Group, the Court will allow a 2|| 21-day extension, but the unopposed motion to extend is otherwise DENIED. The deadline to file 3] the opening brief is EXTENDED to November 13, 2024.

4 IT IS SO ORDERED.

5 Dated: October 17, 2024 Nancy J. Koppe 7 United StatésMajistrate Judge 1]