What is the test for an abuse of time under Rule 9006?

We review the bankruptcy court's decision to shorten the notice period on a motion for summary judgment for an abuse of discretion. Nunez v. Nunez (In re Nunez), 196 B.R. 150, 155 (9th Cir. BAP 1996) (noting that court's decision not to lengthen time under Rule 9006 is reviewed for an abuse of discretion). We follow a two-part test to determine objectively whether the bankruptcy court abused its discretion. United States v. Hinkson, 585 F.3d 1247, 1261-62 (9th Cir.2009). First, we determine de novo whether the bankruptcy court identified the correct legal rule to apply to the relief requested. Id. Second, we examine the bankruptcy court's factual findings under the clearly erroneous standard. Id. at 1262 & n. 20. We must affirm the court's factual findings unless those findings are (1) illogical, (2) implausible, or (3) without support in inferences that may be drawn from the facts in the record. Id. If we determine that the court erred under either part of the test, we must reverse for an abuse of discretion. Id.