Rothschild v. Gildred

Background

At an initial case-management conference, the court gave Plaintiff Thomas Etienne Rothschild permission to file a second amended complaint by July 20, 2023, because the first amended complaint had inadvertent omissions. Rothschild missed that deadline and filed a motion on July 21 asking for an extension until July 27. He cited extreme heat and illness as the reasons for his request.

The Court’s Analysis

The court found that the motion did not meet all the requirements of Civil Local Rule 6-3 for changing a filing deadline. Specifically, Rothschild did not provide a proposed order or a declaration explaining in detail why more time was needed and what substantial harm or prejudice would result if the deadline were not changed.

The court nevertheless considered that Rothschild was representing himself. It explained that courts generally read filings by people without lawyers generously. The court found that Rothschild had given a specific reason for requesting more time and that the defendants would not be prejudiced because they had not yet been served.

Ruling

The court granted Rothschild’s motion for an extension of time to amend. It ordered him to file the second amended complaint no later than July 27, 2023. The court also reminded him that people representing themselves must still follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the district’s local rules, and the court’s standing orders.

Effect

The ruling extended the deadline for Rothschild’s second amended complaint. It did not decide the merits of the underlying dispute or any claims in the complaint.