Cancino Castellar et al v. Kelly et al

Filing 185

ORDER Granting In Part 184 Joint Motion to Continue Case Management Conference ("CMC"). Telephonic CMC reset for 11/5/2021 at 11:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. Signed by Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard on 10/4/2021. (hmw)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11

JOSE ORLANDO CANCINO
CASTELLAR, et al.,

14

ORDER GRANTING IN PART
JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE
CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE

Plaintiffs,

12
13

Case No.: 3:17-cv-491-BAS-AHG

v.
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, et al.,
Defendants.

15

[ECF No. 184]

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Continue Case Management
Conference. ECF No. 184. The parties request that the Court extend the October 5 filing
deadline for their Joint Case Management Statement, and the October 12 Case
Management Conference. Id.
Parties seeking to continue deadlines must demonstrate good cause. Chmb.R. at 2–
3 (stating that any request for continuance requires “[a] showing of good cause for the
request”); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 6(b) (“When an act may or must be done within a
specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time”). “Good cause” is a nonrigorous standard that has been construed broadly across procedural and statutory contexts.
Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause
standard focuses on the diligence of the party seeking to amend the scheduling order and
the reasons for seeking modification. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d

1
3:17-cv-491-BAS-AHG

1

604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (“[T]he focus of the inquiry is upon the moving party’s reasons

2

for seeking modification. . . . If that party was not diligent, the inquiry should end.”)

3

(internal citation omitted). Therefore, “a party demonstrates good cause by acting diligently

4

to meet the original deadlines set forth by the court.” Merck v. Swift Transp. Co., No. CV-

5

16-01103-PHX-ROS, 2018 WL 4492362, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 19, 2018).

6

Here, the Court set a Case Management Conference for October 12, 2021, and

7

required that the parties file their Joint Case Management Statement by October 5, 2021.

8

ECF No. 181. The parties represent to the Court that, because the class certified by this

9

Court is narrower than the class proposed by Plaintiffs, Defendants are currently assessing

10

whether the scope of the class impacts the applicability of the data they produced in

11

discovery thus far, and how this may impact the proposed scheduling of discovery and

12

dispositive motion deadlines. ECF No. 184 at 2. The parties also represent that they are in

13

the process of meeting and conferring regarding a pending fact discovery matter, relating

14

to the reopening of Rule 30(b)(6) depositions concerning new documents that were

15

produced after the original Rule 30(b)(6) depositions took place. Id. Thus, the parties seek

16

a two-week extension of the filing deadline and conference, to October 19 and October 26,

17

respectively. Id. at 3.

18

As an initial matter, the parties’ motion is deficient. First, the Joint Case

19

Management Statement was due on October 5 (see ECF No. 181), but the instant motion

20

to continue that deadline was filed on October 4. ECF No. 184. By filing the motion

21

one day before the affected deadline, the parties failed to follow the Court’s Chambers

22

Rules. See Chmb.R. at 2 (requiring that “[a]ll requests for continuances must be made by

23

a joint motion no less than seven calendar days before the affected date”) (emphasis added).

24

Second, the parties failed to provide a declaration from counsel, as required by the

25

Court’s Chambers Rules. Chmb.R. at 2 (requiring that the joint motion for continuance

26

include a “declaration from counsel seeking the continuance that describes the steps taken

27

to comply with the existing deadlines, and the specific reasons why the deadlines cannot

28

be met”). The Court also notes that this is not the first time the Court has reminded the
2
3:17-cv-491-BAS-AHG

1

parties of their obligations to follow its Chambers Rules in connection with a motion to

2

continue. See ECF No. 112 at 2 n.1 (listing the shortcomings of the motion to continue,

3

including the lack of declaration). The Court will take the parties at their word without the

4

required declaration, but will not do so again.

5

Despite the joint motion’s shortcomings, the Court finds good cause to continue the

6

Case Management Conference. Thus, the parties’ joint motion is GRANTED IN PART

7

as follows:

8

1.

The telephonic, counsel-only Case Management Conference originally set

9

for October 12, 2021 is RESET for November 5, 20211 at 11:00 a.m. before the Honorable

10

Allison H. Goddard. Counsel shall call the chambers teleconference line at 1-877-873-8018

11

and use 8367902 as the access code.

12

2.

The parties must file a Joint Case Management Statement by

13

October 27, 2021. The Joint Case Management Statement must address all points in the

14

“Joint

15

Allison H. Goddard,” which can be found on the court website at:

16

https://www.casd.uscourts.gov/Judges/goddard/docs/Goddard%20Joint%20Case%20Man

17

agement%20Statement%20Rules.pdf.

Case

Management

Statement

Requirements

for

Magistrate

Judge

18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 4, 2021

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The Court recognizes that the parties requested that the Case Management Conference be
reset for October 26, 2021. ECF No. 184 at 3. However, that date is unavailable on the
Court’s calendar.
3
3:17-cv-491-BAS-AHG