Paydar et al v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC
ORDER Denying 27 Second Joint Motion to Extend Expert Disclosure Deadline. Signed by Magistrate Judge William V. Gallo on 10/8/19. (mme)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
REZA PAYDAR et al.,
Case No.: 19-CV-58-BAS(WVG)
ORDER DENYING SECOND JOINT
MOTION TO EXTEND EXPERT
JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH
[Doc. No. 27.]
For the second time, the parties’ jointly move to extend the deadline to exchange
expert disclosures under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2). When the Court granted
the first request on September 12, 2019, the Court expressly admonished that “[n]o other
requests to extend dates to allow the parties to finalize the settlement will be entertained or
granted.” (Doc. No. 26.) Yet the parties now seek extension of the same deadline and
proffer “client unavailability and a miscommunication between the parties regarding the
specifics of a settlement offer to repurchase the subject vehicel [sic]” as supposed good
cause. (Doc. No. 27 at 2.) The motion is DENIED not only because the Court previously
placed the parties on notice that no other extensions would be granted, but also because the
proffered bases for the request fall woefully short of good cause. Additionally, the Court
finds the motion is untimely given that it was filed the day before the extended deadline is
set to expire.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 8, 2019
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?