Patterson v. Six Flags Theme Parks Incorporated et al

Filing 20

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/29/2022 DENYING 19 The parties stipulated request, without prejudice to renewal with a detailed showing of good cause. The Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference set for 9/8/2022, REMAINS on Calendar.(Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

Melvin Patterson,

10
11
12
13

No. 2:21-cv-02398-KJM-AC
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
Six Flags Theme Parks Inc., et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

The court has reviewed the parties’ stipulated request to extend the deadline by which

16

defendants would be required to respond to the complaint, which was filed on the deadline for the

17

defendants’ response. ECF No. 19. The court has granted many previous extensions. See ECF

18

Nos. 9, 11, 13. 16, 18. If the most recent request were granted, the defendants would have been

19

relieved of their obligation to respond to the plaintiffs’ claims for more than 200 days. The

20

parties have not adequately explained the need for such a lengthy extension. The stipulated

21

request at ECF No. 19 is thus denied without prejudice to renewal with a detailed showing of

22

good cause. The status (pretrial scheduling) conference previously set for September 8, 2022

23

remains on calendar. See ECF No. 18.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25

DATED: July 29, 2022.

1