Debbie Johnson v. First Riverbank L.P. et al.

Filing 34

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO TAKE DEFENDANTS' DEPOSITIONS AFTER THE DISCOVERY CUTOFF (Doc. 33 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 3/5/2018. (Kusamura, W)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DEBBIE JOHNSON, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO TAKE DEFENDANTS’ DEPOSITIONS AFTER THE DISCOVERY CUTOFF (Doc. 33) v. FIRST RIVERBANK L.P., et al., Defendants. 11 12 Case No. 1:16-cv-01028-AWI-BAM On March 2, 2018, the parties filed a stipulation agreeing to continue the depositions of Defendants Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc., First Riverbank L.P, and Browman Development Company, Inc. to a mutually convenient and agreed upon time after the discovery cutoff date of April 16, 2018. (Doc. 33.) The parties have failed to identify good cause for the continuance and modification of the scheduling order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4). Nevertheless, the Court is cognizant of the procedural posture of this case, including the pending motion to enforce settlement agreement. (Doc. 23.) The Court therefore finds good cause for the requested modification. Accordingly, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the depositions of Defendants Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc., First Riverbank L.P, and Browman Development Company, Inc. are continued to a mutually convenient and agreed upon time after the discovery cutoff deadline. The parties shall file a status report within 7 days following the decision on the Motion to Enforce Settlement, informing the Court what they intend to do 24 regarding discovery. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: /s/ Barbara March 5, 2018 27 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?