Shine v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Filing 22

ORDER denying as moot 18 Wal-Mart's Unopposed Motion to Modify Scheduling Order; granting in part 20 Wal-Mart's Amended Unopposed Motion to Modify Scheduling Order. Discovery deadline extended to 1/23/2013, for the sole purpose of condu cting discovery relating to the IME experts. Dispositive Motions deadline extended to 2/13/2013. Responses to any dispositive motions shall be filed no later than 2/27/2013, and replies in support of any dispositive motions shall be filed no later than 3/6/2013. By Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 10/30/12. (kfinn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 12–cv–00126–REB–KMT

REBECCA SHINE, a Colorado resident,
Plaintiff,
v.
WAL-MART STORES, INC.,
Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the court on “Wal-Mart’s Amended Unopposed Motion to Modify
Scheduling Order” (Doc. No. 20, filed Oct. 29, 2012), as well as “Wal-Mart’s Unopposed
Motion to Modify Scheduling Order” (Doc. No. 18, filed Oct. 18, 2012). Wal-Mart’s Amended
Motion seeks to extend a number of the Scheduling Order deadlines based on scheduling
complications that occurred with respect to two Rule 35 independent medical examinations of
Plaintiff.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) provides that a scheduling order “may be modified
only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). This “good cause”
standard requires the movant to show that despite diligent efforts, the movant could not meet the

scheduled deadline. See Pumpco, Inc. v. Schenker Int’l, Inc., 204 F.R.D. 667, 668 (D. Colo.
2008).
The court first finds that, contrary to Wal-Mart’s position, the need to reschedule the two
IMEs of Plaintiff was caused by both parties’ failure to consult and confer in a timely manner
well prior to the IMEs. Instead, the parties waited until the last minute to discuss and conduct
this necessary discovery. As such, this court declines to recommend that District Judge Robert
E. Blackburn reschedule the trial dates and, therefore, the Trial Preparation Conference and Jury
Trial remain set for March 29, 2013, and April 15, 2012, respectively, unless altered by District
Judge Blackburn.
Nevertheless, even though the parties largely brought this situation upon themselves, the
court will grant Defendant’s Motion in part—on the condition that the parties will be required to
operate on an expedited schedule in order to retain the trial settings before the District Court.
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that “Wal-Mart’s Amended Unopposed Motion to Modify Scheduling
Order.” (Doc. No. 20) is GRANTED in part. The deadline for rebuttal expert disclosures
relating to the two IMEs only is extended to January 2, 2013. The discovery deadline is
extended to January 23, 2013, for the sole purpose of conducting discovery relating to the IME
experts. The dispositive motions deadline is extended to February 13, 2013. Responses to any
dispositive

2

motions shall be filed no later than February 27, 2013, and replies in support of any dispositive
motions shall be filed no later than March 6, 2013.
It is further
ORDERED that “Wal-Mart’s Unopposed Motion to Modify Scheduling Order” (Doc.
No. 18) is DENIED as moot.
Dated this 30th day of October, 2012.

3