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)
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?