Walker v. McCloud Community Services District
Filing
19
ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 2/16/2017 DENYING 17 Defendant's Ex Parte Application to Modify the Scheduling Order. (Kirksey Smith, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
----oo0oo----
11
12
JEROME WALKER,
15
16
2:16-61 WBS CMK
Plaintiff,
13
14
Civ. No.
v.
ORDER RE: EX PARTE
APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER
MODIFYING THE SCHEDULING
ORDER
MCCLOUD COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT,
Defendant.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
----oo0oo---Before the court is defendant’s ex parte application
for an order modifying the court’s scheduling order to extend the
discovery and law and motion deadlines and reset the trial date.
(Docket No. 17.)
The application is opposed by plaintiff.
(Docket No. 18.)
Having reviewed defendant’s application, the
court finds that defendant has not shown good cause to modify the
scheduling order.
Even assuming the parties had informally
agreed to modify the scheduling order, the parties never agreed
on any new proposed deadlines, and such agreement was not brought
28
1
1
to the court’s attention until now, on the eve of the Pretrial
2
Conference, which was set almost ten months ago.
3
application was filed well after the discovery and dispositive
4
motion deadlines had past.
5
is DENIED.
6
7
Accordingly, the ex parte application
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
Moreover, the
February 16, 2017
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?