Central Coast Pipe Lining Inc v. Pipe Shield USA Inc et al

Filing 31

ORDER DENYING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO CONDUCT DEPOSITIONS 30 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II (lc). Modified on 10/10/2013 (lc).

O

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

CENTRAL COAST PIPE LINING, INC.,

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

v.

Plaintiff,

PIPE SHIELD USA, INC.; PIPE SHIELD
SERVICES, LTD.; B.G. ARNOLD
SERVICES T/A BRADLEY
MECHANICAL SERVICES;
ELASTOCHEM COMPANY
SPECIALTY, INC.; DOES 1–100,
inclusive,

Case No. 2:13-cv-639-ODW(Ex)
ORDER DENYING STIPULATION
TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO
CONDUCT DEPOSITIONS [30]

Defendants.

18

On October 9, 2013, the parties filed a stipulation to continue the discovery

19

cutoff from November 4, 2013, to December 4, 2013, and the last day to conduct the

20

mandatory settlement conference from December 9, 2013, to December 24, 2013.

21

(ECF No. 30.) Plaintiff Central Coast Pipe Lining, Inc. desires to depose B.G. Arnold

22

Services T/A Bradley Mechanical Services’s president Bradley Arnold and third-party

23

witnesses Sam and Brenda DiLoreto. These individuals all reside in Canada.

24

When a district court sets a deadline, a party must present “good cause” for

25

modifying the schedule. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The Ninth Circuit has held that this

26

standard “primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the extension.”

27

Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (internal

28

quotation marks omitted).

1

The Court issued the Scheduling and Case Management Order in this case on

2

July 2, 2013. The Order provided the parties with some five months of discovery.

3

Yet now Central Coast Pipe Lining indicates that it never arranged the deposition of

4

Bradley Mechanical Services’s President—easily one of the most important

5

individuals in this case. The Court understands that Arnold and the DiLoretos are

6

located in Canada. But Central Coast Pipe Lining has not demonstrated that it is

7

necessary to take more than five months to venture to Canada to conduct these

8

depositions.

9

The Court finds that Central Coast Pipe Lining has not demonstrated good

10

cause for altering the Scheduling and Case Management Order. The Court therefore

11

DENIES the parties’ stipulation.

12

unchanged.

13

(ECF No. 30.)

The schedule shall remain

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15

October 10, 2013

16
17
18

____________________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2