Olszanowski v. SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Inc. et al

Filing 9

ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part Joint Motion to Continue Early Neutral Evaluation and Case Management Conference (ECF No. 8 ). Early Neutral Evaluation is continued to 5/23/2025 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard. Signed by Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard on 3/6/2025. (maq)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RAE DEANE OLSZANOWSKI,

Case No.: 3:24-cv-01966-JES-AHG
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

SEAWORLD PARKS &
ENTERTAINMENT, INC., et al.,

15

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART JOINT
MOTION TO CONTINUE EARLY
NEUTRAL EVALUATION AND
CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE

Defendants.

16

[ECF No. 8]

17
18
19

Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Continue the Case Management and

20

Early Neutral Evaluation Conferences. ECF No. 8. The Court previously held an Early

21

Neutral Evaluation Conference (“ENE”) in this matter on December 6, 2024, and set a

22

second ENE for March 18, 2025 along with a continued Case Management Conference

23

(“CMC”). ECF Nos. 6, 7. The parties now seek to continue the ENE and CMC by another

24

60 days. ECF No. 8.

25

Under Fed. R. Civ. P 16(b)(4), “[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause

26

and with the judge’s consent.” “Good cause” is a non-rigorous standard that has been

27

construed broadly across procedural and statutory contexts. Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures,

28

Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause standard focuses on the diligence
1

3:24-cv-01966-JES-AHG

1

of the party seeking to amend the scheduling order and the reasons for seeking

2

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

3

“[T]he court may modify the schedule on a showing of good cause if it cannot reasonably

4

be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, advisory

5

committee’s notes to 1983 amendment. Therefore, “a party demonstrates good cause by

6

acting diligently to meet the original deadlines set forth by the court.” Merck v. Swift

7

Transportation Co., No. CV-16-01103-PHX-ROS, 2018 WL 4492362, at *2 (D. Ariz.

8

Sept. 19, 2018).

9

Here, the parties request a continuance of the ENE and CMC because they have not

10

yet received complete medical records from Plaintiff’s treatment providers in response to

11

their subpoenas. ECF No. 8 at 2-3. Despite requesting records from 2012 – present,

12

Plaintiff’s providers only produced records through 2020, and the records at issue did not

13

include any radiology studies, which are key to Plaintiff’s claims. Id. Notwithstanding the

14

incomplete medical records, the parties went forward with Plaintiff’s deposition on

15

February 19, 2025, and they continue to work together to conduct necessary discovery,

16

including seeking to have Plaintiff undergo an independent medical examination as soon

17

as possible. Id. at 3. The parties believe that further settlement negotiations will not be

18

productive without Plaintiff’s full medical records and the completion of an expert report

19

based on the IME and relevant medical records beforehand. Id.

20

Upon due consideration, the Court finds good cause to GRANT the request to

21

continue the ENE. The Court agrees that settlement discussions will likely be more

22

productive once the parties have obtained all relevant medical records, conducted the IME

23

of Plaintiff, and had the opportunity to prepare expert reports based on that evidence.

24

Accordingly, the ENE is CONTINUED to May 23, 2025 at 9:30 a.m. before Magistrate

25

Judge Allison H. Goddard. The ENE shall take place via videoconference using the Court’s

26

official Zoom account. The primary attorneys responsible for the litigation and party

27

representatives with full and complete authority to enter into a binding settlement for

28

each party must attend the second ENE. No later than May 19, 2025, counsel for each party
2

3:24-cv-01966-JES-AHG

1

must email a participant list to [e-mail] containing (i) the name

2

and title of each participant for that party; (ii) an email address for each participant to

3

receive the Zoom invitation; and (iii) a cell phone number for that party’s attorney point of

4

contact, for the Court to use during the second ENE. Participants are instructed to review

5

the Court’s previous Order setting the ENE (ECF No. 3) for technical guidance regarding

6

the use of Zoom, if needed. All participants must also comply with the Court’s

7

requirements of professional dress and comportment on Zoom, as set forth in the previous

8

Order. The parties may submit optional supplemental ENE statements no later than

9

May 19, 2025 by lodging them with the Court at the email address provided above.

10

However, the request to continue the CMC is DENIED. This action was filed in

11

October 2024 and there is still no case schedule in place. While the Court appreciates that

12

the parties have been working together diligently to complete discovery thus far, the Court

13

finds it will benefit the parties and ensure that discovery remains on track to set firm dates

14

in the case schedule without further delay. Therefore, the CMC shall remain on calendar

15

as previously scheduled on March 18, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. before Judge Goddard. Client

16

participation at the CMC is not required. Court staff will provide a Zoom invitation to the

17

CMC to all counsel of record at least one day prior to the conference. Counsel should be

18

prepared to discuss the case schedule and any other case management matters outlined in

19

the parties’ Joint Case Management Statement during the CMC.

20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 6, 2025

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3

3:24-cv-01966-JES-AHG