Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-04202/USCOURTS-cand-5_16-cv-04202-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

JOY MACKELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-cv-04202-BLF 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO FILE 

A LATE BRIEF

[Re: ECF 33]

Plaintiff Joy Mackell (“Mackell”) moves the Court for leave to file a late opposition to 

Defendants’ motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). ECF 33. Mackell argues that there is 

good cause because the opposition had already been prepared but was not filed due to an 

inadvertent clerical error. Id. Mackell further argues that there would be no prejudice to 

Defendants because Defendants could still to file their reply in support of their motion to dismiss.

Under Rule 6(b), a “determination of whether neglect is excusable is an equitable one that 

depends on at least four factors: (1) the danger of prejudice to the opposing party; (2) the length of 

the delay and its potential impact on the proceedings; (3) the reason for the delay; and (4) whether 

the movant acted in good faith.” Bateman v. U.S. Postal Serv., 231 F.3d 1220, 1223-24 (9th Cir.

2000). The Court finds that there is no danger of prejudice to Defendants because the hearing for 

Defendants’ motion to dismiss has been vacated and a reply could still be filed. Moreover, 

Defendants have not opposed this motion to file a late opposition. At this early stage of the case, 

the late opposition would have no significant impact on the progression of the case. The Court 

additionally finds the inadvertent clerical error to be an excusable neglect. Based on these 

reasons, the Court GRANTS Mackell’s motion for leave to file a late opposition to Defendants’ 

motion to dismiss.

Case 5:16-cv-04202-BLF Document 36 Filed 12/10/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Mackell shall file the opposition attached as Exhibit A to its administrative motion, ECF 

34-1, as a separate docket entry on or before December 13, 2016. Defendants shall file their reply 

on or before December 20, 2016. The Court will then rule on Defendants’ motion to dismiss on 

the submitted papers without a hearing.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 9, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:16-cv-04202-BLF Document 36 Filed 12/10/16 Page 2 of 2