Emanuel v. Cooke

Attorney General SAMUEL L. PEZONE, JR. (Bar No. 15978) Deputy Attorney General State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General 1 State of Nevada Way, Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 (702) 486-4070 (phone) (702) 486-3768 (fax) Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendants Shane Brown, Tasheena Cooke, David Drummond, Michael Gamberg, William Gittere, Justin Milke, and Madeline Pickens 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA TROY EMANUEL, JR., Case No. 3:23-cv-00564-MMD-CSD 13 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFNDANTS’ v. MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF THE DEADLINE TO FILE DISPOSITIVE COOKE, et al, MOTIONS 16 Defendants. [SECOND REQUEST] 17 Defendants, Shane Brown, Tasheena Cooke, David Drummond, Michael Gamberg, William Gittere, Justin Milke, and Madeline Pickens, hereby request an extension of the current deadline to file dispositive motions. This is Defendants’ second request for the extension of this scheduling order deadline.

21 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES I. LEGAL STANDARD 23 To prevail on a motion to extend previous scheduling order deadlines, the moving party must show “good cause.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); LR 26-3. To demonstrate good cause, the party must show “that, even in the exercise of due diligence, [the parties were] unable to meet the timetable set forth in the order.” Cruz v. City of Anaheim, CV-10-03997-MMM-JEMX, 2011 WL 13214312, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 19, 2011) (citing Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002); Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 || F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992)). Prejudice to the opposing party is a factor in determining good || cause, though lack of prejudice is “not a prerequisite.” Jd.

ARGUMENT 4 Defendants seek a second short extension of the deadline to file dispositive motions, ||currently set for July 11, 2025. ECF No. 64. Good cause is present for a 7-day extension of || this deadline, until July 18, 2025.

7 Undersigned counsel has completed a draft of the Defendants’ Motion for Summary || Judgment. However, counsel is still awaiting his clients’ review and approval of multiple || supporting declarations, which will prevent counsel from filing Defendants’ motion by this || Friday, July 11, 2025. The requested extension will enable undersigned counsel to obtain 11 clients’ supporting declarations, as well as to finalize and file Defendants’ summary ||judgment motion. Plaintiff will not be prejudiced by this relatively short extension.

138 Accordingly, Defendants respectfully request that the extension be granted for good ||cause shown. See Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1260, (9th Cir. 2010) || (holding that the “district court abused its discretion in denying party’s timely motion” to ||extend time because the party “demonstrated the ‘good cause’ required by Rule 6, and 17 because there was no reason to believe that [the party] was acting in bad faith or was || misrepresenting his reasons for asking for the extension”).

19 CONCLUSION 20 Defendants request an extension of time until July 18, 2025, to file Defendants’ || dispositive motion. Good cause is present to extend this deadline.

22 DATED this 10th day of July, 2025.

23 AARON D. FORD oA Attorney General By:_/s/ Samuel L. Pezone, Jr. 25 SAMUEL L. PEZONE, JR. (Bar No. 15978) 26 Deputy Attorney General 97 Attorneys for Defendants || IT SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 11, 2025. c Ss ( Hy