United States District Court, D. Nevada
A. Dotson, Jill I. Greiner and DAVIS GRAHAM & STUBBS LLP,
Adam S. Cohen, Kenzo S. Kawanabe, Constance L. Rogers, Kyle
W. Brenton, Attorneys for Defendants BP America Inc., and
Atlantic Richfield Company.
UNOPPOSED MOTION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO
RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT AND TO RESPOND AND REPLY TO INITIAL
R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6 and Local Rule IA 6-1,
Plaintiffs BP America Inc. (“BPA”) and Atlantic
Richfield Company (“ARC”) move to extend the time
allowed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) and Local Rule 7-2 for the
parties to respond to the Complaint and to file, respond to,
and reply in support of certain initial motions, as set forth
to filing this Motion, undersigned counsel conferred with
counsel for the Defendants Yerington Paiute Tribe
(“Tribe”), Laurie A. Thom in her official
capacity as Chairman of the Yerington Paiute Tribe
(“Chairman Thom”), Yerington Paiute Tribal Court
(“Tribal Court”), and Sandra-Mae Pickens in her
official capacity as Judge of the Yerington Paiute Tribal
Court (“Judge Pickens”). Defendants do not oppose
this Motion, but they expressly reserve and do not waive all
arguments, including those relating to jurisdiction and
the first request to extend the filing deadlines for the
submissions addressed herein. In support of this Motion, BPA
and ARC state as follows:
August 18, 2017, the Tribe filed a related action in the
Yerington Paiute Tribal Court, captioned Yerington Paiute
Tribe v. BP America Inc. & Atlantic Richfield Co.,
Case No. CV1017, against BPA and ARC (the “Tribal Court
September 22, 2017, BPA and ARC filed a Motion to Dismiss for
Lack of Jurisdiction or, in the alternative, a Motion to Stay
Pending Resolution of the Federal Court Action (“Motion
to Dismiss”) in the Tribal Court Action.
allow for briefing and determination of the relevant and
related jurisdictional and other issues by this court, the
Tribe filed an unopposed motion in the Tribal Court action
extending the time allowed (i) for the Tribe to file a
response to the Motion to Dismiss until December 1, 2017,
(ii) for BPA and ARC to file a reply until January 15, 2018;
and (iii) for a hearing to be held by the Tribal Court on
January 30, 2018.
September 22, 2017, BPA and ARC filed their Complaint for
Declaratory and Injunctive Relief in this court, naming the
Tribe, Chairman Thom, the Tribal Court, and Judge Pickens as
defendants. BPA and ARC simultaneously filed a Motion for
Preliminary Injunction and a Request for Expedited
Consideration (“Preliminary Injunction Motion”).
and ARC effected service of the Summons, Complaint, and
Preliminary Injunction Motion on all four defendants on
October 5, 2017 See Proofs of Service (Dkt.
Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i), Defendants have until
October 26, 2017, to respond to the Complaint.
Counsel for the Tribe and Chairman Thom have indicated that
they will file a motion to dismiss.
and ARC reasonably assume that some or all of the Defendants
will raise related arguments in both their motion(s) to
dismiss and their response(s) to the Preliminary Injunction
Motion. Similarly, BPA and ARC will present related
counter-arguments in their response and reply briefs. As a
result, counsel for the parties have ...