Glaum v. Braun et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Joseph E. Glaum, 	)
) 	ORDER
Plaintiff, 	)
)
vs. 	)
)
Colby Braun and Joseph Joyce, 	)
) 	Case No. 1:24-cv-146
Defendants. 	)
On October 28, 2025, Plaintiff filed what is styled as a scheduling and discovery plan. (Doc.
No. 91). 1 The court construes Plaintiff’s filing as a motion to extend the deadline to complete fact
discovery. (Doc. No. 91).
The parties currently have until October 24, 2025, to complete fact discovery and file
discovery motions. (Doc. No. 62). Plaintiff asserts that, due to circumstances out of his control, he
requires additional time to complete discovery. He does not explicitly state how much additional
time he requires. He does, however, propose a deadline of December 20, 2025, for Rule 26(a)(1)
disclosures. Given the present posture of this case, the court interprets this proposal as a request to
extend the discovery deadline until December 20, 2025.
The court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. No. 91) insofar as he is seeking an extension
of fact discovery deadlines. 	The parties shall have until December 20, 2025, to complete fact
discovery and file discovery motions.
1 In his proposed plan, Plaintiff represents that the parties conferred on July 23, 2025, and agreed upon the
contents of his proposed plan. The court finds this representation to be highly dubious as the Defendants previously
submitted a proposed plan in which they represented that the parties had conferred on July 23, 2025, but unilaterally
proposed different deadlines than those now being proposed by Plaintiff. The court ended up adopting Defendants’ plan
on July 29, 2025. (Doc. No. 62).
1
Case 1:24-cv-00146-CRH Document 93 Filed 10/30/25 Page 1 of 2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 30th day of October, 2025.
/s/ Clare R. Hochhalter
Clare R. Hochhalter, Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
2
Case 1:24-cv-00146-CRH Document 93 Filed 10/30/25 Page 2 of 2