Sery v. Heavy Putter, LLC et al

Filing 26

ORDER denying 25 Joint Motion to Continue Deadline for Motion for Determination of Discovery Dispute No.1. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nita L. Stormes on 6/1/2018. (anh)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSEPH SERY, Case No.: 3:17-cv-2334-JAH-NLS Plaintiff, 12 13 v. 14 ORDER DENYING JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE DEADLINE FOR MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF DISCOVERY DISPUTE NO. 1 HEAVY PUTTER, LLC, et al., Defendants. 15 [ECF No. 25] 16 17 18 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Continue Motion for Determination 19 of Discovery Dispute No. 1. ECF No. 25. This is the second request to extend the 20 deadline. See ECF No. 20. The parties submit they are in the process of reviewing 21 documents and have been unable to resolve their disputes as to document requests 22 regarding alter ego allegations. ECF No. 25 at 1. The parties request the Court extend the 23 deadline to file a dispute regarding the alter ego requests by upwards of four months, to 24 September 30, 2018 and indicate that fact and expert discovery deadlines otherwise set 25 forth in the Scheduling Order may be affected. Id. The parties submit that the need for 26 court intervention will be limited if more time is allowed for the parties to produce and 27 review documents. Id. 28 1 3:17-cv-2334-JAH-NLS 1 Trial courts “set schedules and establish deadlines to foster the efficient treatment 2 and resolution of cases. Those efforts will be successful only if the deadlines are taken 3 seriously by the parties.” Wong v. Regents of the Univ. of Calif., 410 F.3d 1052, 1060, 4 1062 (9th Cir. 2005). Courts set such schedules to permit the court and the parties to deal 5 with cases in a thorough and orderly manner, and they must be allowed to enforce them, 6 unless there are good reasons not to.” Id. 7 The parties have not presented good cause to support such a lengthy extension of 8 the deadline. As it stands, the discovery dispute on this issue remains three weeks away, 9 June 22, 2018. See ECF No. 23. The Court encourages the parties to continue to meet 10 and confer on the issues related to the document requests regarding alter ego and any 11 other discovery disputes; but continued production and review of documents for upwards 12 of four months does not present good cause. See Judge Stormes Civil Case Procedures, § 13 6(C)(2)(d) (“ongoing meet and confer efforts, rolling document productions or 14 supplemental responses do not extend the deadline”). 15 16 17 18 The parties Joint Motion to Continue Motion for Determination of Discovery Dispute No. 1is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 1, 2018 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 3:17-cv-2334-JAH-NLS

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?