Dukes et al v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Filing
875
ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer denying 867 Motion for Extension of Time to File. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/18/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
EXTENSION
Plaintiffs,
13
14
No. C 01-2252 CRB
DUKES, ET AL.,
v.
WAL-MART STORES, INC.,
15
Defendant.
/
16
Plaintiffs ask that this Court grant them an additional six months to file their motion
17
18
for class certification. See dkt. 867. Wal-Mart opposes the request. See dkt. 874.
19
Extensions may be granted “for good cause,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), which the Court
20
finds absent here. The Court initially made the motion due January 11 2013, see dkt. 812 at
21
14, and then approved the parties’ stipulation extending the deadline an additional three
22
months to April 11, 2013, see dkt. 833.
23
Extensive discovery had already been completed while this case proceeded as a
24
nationwide class action, Seligman Decl., dkt. 761 ¶ 3, and the current discovery period
25
presented a limited opportunity to supplement that record–not to start from scratch. Plaintiffs
26
say discovery disputes have hampered their progress, but every party has to prioritize and
27
tailor its discovery efforts in light of court-imposed deadlines and the time it takes to resolve
28
//
1
formal disputes, which the Court has demonstrated its willingness to address promptly. E.g.,
2
dkts. 872, 863, 837. Having already granted a three-month extension, the Court finds no
3
good cause for further extension.
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
7
CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: March 18, 2013
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
G:\CRBALL\2001\2252\order denying extension.wpd
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?