Miller v. Easy Day Studios Pty. Ltd.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Larry Alan Burns (author)
Analysis
Defendant Easy Day Studios Pty Ltd filed an ex parte application for an extension of time to respond to the initial complaint, which the plaintiff opposed. The court granted the application, finding good cause based on the policy favoring decisions on the merits, and set a deadline of January 27, 2021, for the response.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Ex Parte Application for Extension of Time to Respond to Initial Complaint granted“The Application is GRANTED. Easy Day may respond to the Complaint on or before January 27, 2021.” | agree with court The court applied the 'good cause' standard, which is the correct standard for granting extensions of time under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b). The court cited the strong policy favoring decisions on the merits and the purpose of Rule 1 to support its finding of good cause. This is a standard and appropriate exercise of discretion in a district court. |
The order itself: sound — The order is a short, procedural ruling on a motion for an extension of time. It correctly identifies the relevant legal standard (good cause) and cites appropriate authorities (Rule 1 and Eitel v. McCool) to support the decision. The reasoning is concise but sufficient for this type of routine motion.
Opinion
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ZACHARY MILLER, an individual, Case No. 20cv2187-LAB-DEB 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE 12 APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION v. OF TIME TO RESPOND TO INITIAL 13 COMPLAINT EASY DAY STUDIOS PTY LTD, an 14 Australian proprietary limited company; REVERB 15 COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a 16 California corporation; and DOES 1- 25 INCLUSIVE, 17 Defendants. 18 19 Defendant Easy Day Studios Pty Ltd filed an Ex Parte Application for 20 Extension of Time to Respond to Initial Complaint. The Court has considered 21 the Application, Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition, and the exhibits 22 submitted in support of each. In light of Easy Day’s appearance in this matter, 23 the “strong policy underlying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure favoring 24 decisions on the merits,” Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1472 (9th Cir. 25 1986), and the likelihood that default proceedings would impede, rather than 26 promote, “the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of [this] action,” 27 Fed. R. Civ. P. 1, the Court finds good cause for the requested extension. The Application is GRANTED. Easy Day may respond to the Complaint on 2|| or before January 27, 2021. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5|| DATED: December 30, 2020 (aug 4 □ Zuni 6 Hon. Larry A. Burns Chief United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28