SPM Thermo-Shield, Inc. v. SICC, GMBH et al

Filing 44

ORDER granting 43 Plaintiff's Motion to Extend the Expert Report Deadline. Plaintiff shall have up to and including April 14, 2017 to disclose expert reports. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carol Mirando on 3/6/2017. (HJ)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION SPM THERMO-SHIELD, INC., Plaintiff, v. Case No: 2:15-cv-439-FtM-29CM SICC, GMBH and WALDEMAR WALCZOK, Defendants. ORDER This matter comes before the Court upon review of Plaintiff's Motion to Extend the Expert Report Deadline (Doc. 43) filed on February 28, 2017. Plaintiff seeks to extend the deadline of March 1, 2017 to disclose expert reports to April 14, 2017 because Plaintiff’s expert needs documents in order to determine the extent of Plaintiff’s lost profits. Doc. 43 at 1-2. Plaintiff alleges that it currently is in the process of preparing discovery requests seeking necessary documents. Id. at 2. Plaintiff also argues that the requested extension will not impact any other deadlines, including the discovery deadline of May 15, 2017. oppose the requested relief. Id. at 3. Defendants do not Id. at 5. On December 29, 2016, Senior United States District Judge John E. Steele entered a Case Management and Scheduling Order (“CMSO”) setting the deadlines to disclose expert reports for Plaintiff to March 1, 2017 and for Defendants to March 31, 2017, the discovery deadline to May 15, 2017, the mediation deadline to May 19, 2017, the deadline for dispositive motions to June 15, 2017, and a trial term of October 2, 2017. Doc. 39 at 1-2. District courts have broad discretion when managing their cases in order to ensure that the cases move to a timely and orderly conclusion. Chrysler Int’l Corp. v. Chemaly, 280 F.3d 1358, 1360 (11th Cir. 2002). Rule 16 requires a showing of good cause for modification of a court’s scheduling order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “This good cause standard precludes modification unless the schedule cannot be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Sosa v. Airprint Sys., Inc., 133 F. 3d 1417, 1418 (11th Cir. 1998) (internal quotations and citations omitted). Here, the Court finds good cause to grant the requested relief based upon Plaintiff’s representations. Doc. 43. The CMSO also has not been altered, and Plaintiff alleges that the requested extension will not impact the remaining CMSO deadlines. Id. at 3. ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff's Motion to Extend the Expert Report Deadline (Doc. 43) is GRANTED. 2. Plaintiff shall have up to and including April 14, 2017 to disclose expert reports. 3. All other deadlines and directives in the Case Management and Scheduling Order (Doc. 39) remain in effect. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on this 6th day of March, 2017. -2- Copies: Counsel of record -3-

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?