London v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing 57

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 1/10/2019 DENYING 56 Motion to Compel as untimely and VACATING the 1/30/2019 hearing. (Huang, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DEBRA LONDON,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:17-cv-00687 KJM AC

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A,
Defendant.

16
17
18

Before the court is plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery, filed January 9, 2019, with a

19

hearing date of January 30, 2019 requested. ECF No. 56. Discovery in this matter is set to be

20

completed by January 30, 2019. ECF No. 54. The court’s original pre-trial scheduling order

21

specified that “‘completed’ means that all discovery shall have been conducted so that all

22

depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to discovery shall have been resolved by

23

appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been

24

obeyed.” ECF No. 35 at 2. Although the district judge recently extended the original discovery

25

deadline, she did not change that definition. See ECF No. 54.

26

Plaintiff’s motion to compel is untimely and therefore will not be considered. Local Rule

27

251(a) requires a motion be filed at least 21 days before the hearing date. A motion to compel

28

filed January 9 cannot possibly comply with the January 30 deadline for its resolution and
1

1

compliance with any resulting order. The parties are free to continue to engage in informal

2

negotiations regarding discovery, but the right to seek enforcement by this court via a motion to

3

compel has concluded. ECF Nos. 35, 54.

4
5
6
7

Because plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 56) is untimely, it is DENIED and the hearing set for
January 30, 2019 is VACATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: January 10, 2019

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2