Yates v. Sweet Potato Enterprise, Inc. et al

Filing 22

ORDER DENYING 21 Stipulation filed by Sweet Potato Enterprise, Inc., Helen L. Ng, Craig Yates, Kuan L. Ng. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 10/18/12. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/18/2012)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3

OAKLAND DIVISION

4
5 CRAIG YATES, an individual,

Plaintiff,

6
7

vs.

8 SWEET POTATO ENTERPRISES, INC., a

Case No: C 11-1950 SBA
ORDER DENYING STIPULATION
TO MODIFY PRETRIAL
SCHEDULE
Dkt. 21

California corporation dba POPEYES STORE
9 # 2794; et al.,
Defendants.

10
11
12

The parties have filed a stipulation to modify the Court’s pretrial schedule. Federal

13

Rule of Civil Procedure 16 provides that deadlines established in a pretrial scheduling may

14

“be modified only for good cause[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “Good cause” exists when a

15

deadline “cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the

16

extension.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992)

17

(citation omitted). Thus, “Rule 16(b)’s ‘good cause’ standard primarily considers the

18

diligence of the party seeking the amendment.” Id.; see also Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co.,

19

232 F.3d 1271, 1294 (9th Cir. 2000). Where the moving party has not been diligent, the

20

inquiry ends and the motion should be denied. Zivkovic v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 302 F.3d

21

1080, 1087 (9th Cir.2002); Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609. Here, the parties’ stipulation fails to

22

specify the basis or otherwise establish good cause for their proposed request.

23

Accordingly,

24

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the parties’ stipulation to modify the Court’s

25

pretrial scheduling order is DENIED.

26

IT IS SO ORDERED.

27
28

Dated: 10/18/12

________________________________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
United States District Judge