Robert P. Perreten v. Burlington Northern Railroad Company, Robert P. Perreten v. Burlington Northern Railroad Company

99 F.3d 1146 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Robert P. PERRETEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. Robert P. PERRETEN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 95-35459, 95-35546. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 18, 1996. * Decided Oct. 21, 1996. Before: WRIGHT, SCHROEDER and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 The railroad argues the district court abused its discretion in granting Mr. Perreten an extension to file his notice of appeal. The standards for "excusable neglect" have been liberalized from what they previously were in this circuit by Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Assocs., 113 S.Ct. 1489 (1993); Marx v. Loral Corp., 87 F.3d 1049, 1053-54 (9th Cir.1996). The word "neglect" "encompasses both simple, faultless omissions to act and, more commonly, omissions caused by carelessness." Pioneer, 113 S.Ct. at…