United States of America et al v. Institute of Cardiovascular Excellence, PLLC et al

Filing 83

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 82 Motion to extend time. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith on 12/11/2015. (Smith, Thomas)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA OCALA DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and ROBERT A. GREEN, Plaintiffs, v. Case No: 5:11-cv-406-Oc-37TBS INSTITUTE OF CARDIOVASCULAR EXCELLENCE, PLLC, ICE HOLDINGS, PLLC, ASAD ULLAH QAMAR and HUMERA A. QAMAR, Defendants. ORDER This case comes before the Court on Defendants’ Unopposed Motion and Incorporated Memorandum to Extend the Time for Responsive Pleadings, to Extend Discovery Deadlines, and to Continue Trial Date (Doc. 82). Defendants’ answers to Plaintiffs’ and Intervenor’s complaints are currently due by February 1, 2016 (Doc. 82 at 1). The Court has entered a Case Management and Scheduling Order (“CMSO”) establishing the following additional deadlines: Disclosure of Expert Reports February 18, 2016 Discovery Deadline May 6, 2016 Mediation May 27, 2016 Dispositive and Daubert Motions June 6, 2016 All other Motions September 29, 2016 Joint Final Pretrial Statement October 2, 2016 Final Pretrial Conference October 20, 2016 Trial Term Begins November 7, 2016 (Doc. 65). Defendants seek an order extending all deadlines for three months to give the parties time to negotiate a resolution of this controversy and related proceedings. They argue that granting the motion will conserve the parties’ resources and promote judicial economy if they are able to settle in advance of the proposed new deadlines (Doc. 82). The CMSO states: 1. Dispositive Motions Deadline and Trial Not Extended Motions to extend the dispositive motions deadline or to continue the trial are generally denied. See Local Rule 3.05(c)(2)(E). The Court will grant an exception only when necessary to prevent manifest injustice. A motion for a continuance of the trial is subject to denial if it fails to comply with Local Rule 3.09. The Court cannot extend a dispositive motion deadline to the eve of trial. In light of the district court’s heavy trial calendar, at least four months are required before trial to receive memoranda in opposition to a motion for summary judgment, and to research and resolve the dispositive motion. 2. Extensions of Other Deadlines Disfavored – Motions for an extension of other deadlines established in this order, including motions for an extension of the discovery period, are disfavored. The deadline will not be extended absent a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b); Local Rule 3.09(a). Failure to complete discovery within the time established by this Order shall not constitute cause for continuance. A motion to extend an established deadline normally will be denied if the motion fails to recite that: 1) the motion is joint or unopposed; 2) the additional discovery is necessary for specified reasons; 3) all parties agree that the extension will not affect the dispositive motions deadline and trial date; 4) all parties agree that any discovery conducted after the dispositive motions date established in this Order will not be available for summary judgment purposes; and 5) no party will use the granting of the extension in support of a motion to extend another date or deadline. The filing of a motion for extension of time does not toll the time for compliance with deadlines established by Rule or Order. (Doc. 65 at 5). -2- After due consideration, Defendant’s motion is GRANTED in part, and the parties shall comply with the following new deadlines: Disclosure of Expert Reports May 18, 2016 Discovery Deadline August 8, 2016 Mediation August 6, 2016 Discovery conducted after the dispositive motions deadline will not be available for summary judgment purposes. Defendants have not shown why manifest injustice will result if the trial date and deadlines for dispositive and Daubert motions are not extended. Accordingly, the remainder of Defendants’ motion is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on December 11, 2015. Copies furnished to 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?