Montes v. Capstone Logistics, LLC

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California deemed Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration untimely filed but allowed the Court to consider its arguments. The Court also directed Defendants to file any reply briefs within ten days, declined to reset the hearing, and admonished Plaintiff regarding the improper use of ex parte procedures and failure to follow current local rules.

Holdings

1. The court may permit consideration of Plaintiff's opposition despite its untimely filing because the circumstances did not establish substantial prejudice or bad faith, and the opposition would assist the court in resolving the motion to compel arbitration.
2. Plaintiff's opposition was untimely because the operative Local Rule 230(c) required filing and service no later than fourteen days after the motion was filed.
3. Plaintiff's request was procedurally improper as an ex parte application because Defendants had notice of the request and no hearing was set or concurrently filed motion required shortening of time.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's request for leave to file an opposition nine days late was properly evaluated as a request for an extension based on excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(B).
2. Whether the court should consider Plaintiff's untimely opposition despite her failure to comply with Local Rule 230(c).
3. Whether Plaintiff's request was properly brought as an ex parte application or as an application to shorten time under Local Rule 144(e).

Disposition

other