LegalZoom.com Inc v. Rocket Lawyer Incorporated

Filing 214

MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) COURT ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S STATUS REPORT CONCERNING THIRD PARTY DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL EXTENSION OF COURT DEADLINES (Dockt. # 212 ) by Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott. Before the Court is a request by Plaintiff LegalZoom to move the deadline to complete third party discovery by an additional 120 days to September 16, 2015. Defendant Rocket Lawyer Incorporated responded to Plaintiff's request only with the statement, "Rocket Lawyer does not believe a further extension to be necessary or appropriate." Rocket Lawyer, however, does not explain this conclusory statement, this Court's January 20, 2015 Order specifically contemplated that a request for an additional extension of the deadlines might occur, and, most importantly, Rocket Lawyer does not demonstrate or even discuss how it would be prejudiced by the requested extension. Plaintiff's request is GRANTED. (kl)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV 12-9942 JEM

Title

LEGALZOOM.COM INC v. ROCKET LAWYER INCORPORATED

Present: The Honorable

Date

April 17, 2015

JOHN E. MCDERMOTT, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

S. Anthony
Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

None

None

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS) COURT ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S STATUS
REPORT CONCERNING THIRD PARTY DISCOVERY AND
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL EXTENSION OF COURT DEADLINES
(Dockt. # 212)

Before the Court is a request by Plaintiff LegalZoom to move the deadline to complete
third party discovery by an additional 120 days to September 16, 2015. Defendant Rocket
Lawyer Incorporated responded to Plaintiff’s request only with the statement, “Rocket Lawyer
does not believe a further extension to be necessary or appropriate.” Rocket Lawyer,
however, does not explain this conclusory statement, this Court’s January 20, 2015 Order
specifically contemplated that a request for an additional extension of the deadlines might
occur, and, most importantly, Rocket Lawyer does not demonstrate or even discuss how it
would be prejudiced by the requested extension. Plaintiff’s request is GRANTED.

cc: Parties
:
Initials of Preparer
CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

sa
Page 1 of 1