Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Bambi Gicana et al

Filing 66

ORDER Striking Maloney's Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment 59 by Judge Ronald S.W. Lew. Because Maloney ignored the deadline, the Motion is STRICKEN. The Court will only consider Maloney's Opposition to Gicana's Motion for Summary Judgment ("Opposition") 59 . Maloney shall not file any further documentation regarding her Opposition or stricken Motion. (jre)

1
2

O

3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY,
13
Plaintiff-in14
Interpleader,
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
v.
)
)
)
BAMBI GICANA; and ARACELI
)
MALONEY,
)
)
Defendants-in- )
Interpleader. )
)
___________________________ )
)
AND RELATED CROSS AND
)
COUNTER CLAIMS
)
___________________________ )

CV 16-08317-RSWL-RAO
ORDER Striking Maloney’s
Motion for Summary
Judgment or Partial
Summary Judgment [59]

Currently before the Court is Defendant/Cross

24 Defendant/Counter Claimant Araceli Maloney’s
25 (“Maloney”) Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial
26 Summary Judgment (“Motion”) [59].

Having reviewed all

27 papers submitted pertaining to this Motion, the Court
28 NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS:
1

1 the Court STRIKES Maloney’s Motion.
2

I. BACKGROUND

3

The filing deadline for motions was February 6,

4 2018.

Nevertheless, and without moving to modify the

5 Court’s Scheduling Order [34], Maloney filed the
6 instant Motion [59] on February 20, 2018.
7

II. DISCUSSION

8 A.

Legal Standard

9

A scheduling order “may be modified only for good

10 cause and with the judge’s consent.”

In re W. States

11 Wholesale Nat. Gas Antitrust Litig., 715 F.3d 716, 737
12 (9th Cir. 2013)(quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4)).
13 “Good cause” primarily concerns the diligence of the
14 party seeking to modify the scheduling order.

Johnson

15 v. Mammoth Recreations, 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir.
16 1992).

Prejudice to the opposing party might supply

17 additional reasons for denying the modification.

Id.

18 B.

Analysis

19

Even if Maloney had moved to modify the Scheduling

20 Order, there is no good cause for filing this Motion
21 late.

Maloney and Defendant/Counter Claimant/Counter

22 Defendant Bambi Gicana (“Gicana”) met and conferred on
23 January 2, 2018, and Maloney even filed her Motion for
24 Judgment on the Pleadings [54] on the last day of the
25 filing deadline.

If Maloney had acted diligently, she

26 also would have filed the instant Motion within the
27 deadline.

Since Maloney was not diligent, the inquiry

28 ends, and the Court need not inquire into Gicana’s
2

1 prejudice.
2

Id.

Because Maloney ignored the deadline, the Motion is

3 STRICKEN.

The Court will only consider Maloney’s

4 Opposition to Gicana’s Motion for Summary Judgment
5 (“Opposition”) [59].

Maloney shall not file any

6 further documentation regarding her Opposition or
7 stricken Motion.
8
9

III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Court STRIKES Maloney’s

10 Motion [59].
11 IT IS SO ORDERED.
12 DATED: February 27, 2018

s/

13

HONORABLE RONALD S.W. LEW
Senior U.S. District Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3