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