The court denied a creditor’s motion to extend the deadline to file a complaint objecting to the debtors’ discharge or to determine the dischargeability of debts. The court declined to equitably toll the deadline because the creditor’s counsel did not act diligently to preserve the creditor’s rights, instead waiting until the afternoon of the last day to contact debtors’ counsel about extending the deadline, then encountering technical difficulties in attempting to file the agreed-upon motion. The court noted that equitable relief is granted sparingly, and is unlikely to be used to rescue a claimant who has failed to exercise due diligence in protecting his rights. Here, the court said, too many questions remain as to why creditor’s counsel did not act more promptly or take additional steps to protect the client’s rights.