Theranos, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Company

Filing 54

ORDER DENYING STIPULATED REQUEST FOR EXTENSION by Hon. William Alsup denying 53 Stipulation.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/2/2015)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
THERANOS, INC.,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,

No. C 14-04880 WHA

v.
BECTON DICKINSON AND
COMPANY,

ORDER DENYING STIPULATED
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION

Defendant.
/

16
17

The parties have filed a joint stipulation seeking extensions of six to eight weeks on all

18

deadlines in this case. The reasons offered are that the parties were delayed in conducting

19

discovery because they could not agree on a protective order, their early mediation efforts were

20

delayed in part by the selected mediator’s medical issues, and plaintiff brought on a new general

21

counsel. None of these is persuasive. The scheduling order in this case gave the parties more

22

time for discovery than they asked for in their joint case management statement, and in

23

particular, it is their own fault they wasted time on protective order disputes. Accordingly, the

24

parties’ request for an extension is DENIED. All deadlines remain in place.

25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Dated: September 2, 2015.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE