Waldo v. Eli Lilly & Company
Filing
69
ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 5/15/15 ORDERING that the 68 Ex Parte Application is GRANTED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ANGELA WALDOW,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:13-cv-00789-KJM-EFB
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
ELI LILLY & COMPANY,
Defendant.
16
17
Defendant Eli Lilly and Company (“Lilly”) moves ex parte to amend the Status
18
(Pretrial Scheduling) Conference Order, ECF No. 30, to continue two deadlines: (1) the deadline
19
to hear motions to compel discovery and (2) the deadline for expert disclosures. ECF No. 68.
20
Under the Local Rules of this District, a court may, in its discretion, grant an initial
21
extension ex parte upon a declaration from counsel explaining why an extension is necessary and
22
why a stipulation cannot be obtained. E.D. Cal. L.R. 144(c). Defense counsel has filed such a
23
declaration, explaining that plaintiff has not responded to any of the defense’s discovery requests
24
since the withdrawal of plaintiff’s counsel, and defendant is unclear whether plaintiff intends to
25
continue pursuing this litigation. ECF No. 68-2 at 2–3.
26
After reviewing the arguments and evidence, the application is granted. The
27
scheduling order is amended to vacate the current deadline to disclose experts by May 15, 2015,
28
1
1
as well as the deadline to hear motions to compel discovery by June 15, 2015. The court will
2
issue an amended scheduling order setting further deadlines, if necessary, following the scheduled
3
June 11, 2015 status conference, where plaintiff is directed to appear and indicate whether she
4
intends to seek counsel and continue pursuing this litigation.
5
The motion is GRANTED.
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
7
DATED: May 15, 2015.
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?