Traturyk v. Western-Southern Life Assurance Company

Filing 37

ORDER denying 36 Motion to extend time to serve Plaintiff's expert witness report. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith on 2/19/2016. (Smith, Thomas)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
MONICA SALGUERO TRATURYK,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 6:15-cv-1347-Orl-40TBS

WESTERN-SOUTHERN LIFE
ASSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
ORDER
For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Thirty (30) Day Extension of Time
to Serve Plaintiff’s Expert Disclosures Pursuant to the Pretrial Scheduling Order [DE No.
22] and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) (Doc. 36) is DENIED.
Local Rule 3.01(a) requires that all motions contain “a memorandum of legal
authority in support of the request.” The motion does not include a memorandum of law.
Local Rule 3.01(g) requires that most motions (including this one), include a
certification that before the motion was filed, counsel conferred and that as a result of that
conference, the opponent does, or does not oppose the motion. The pending motion
does not contain the certification required by Local Rule 3.01(g).
The Case Management and Scheduling Order (“CMSO”) governing the case
provides:
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). Failure to
complete discovery within the time established by this Order
shall not constitute good cause for continuance. A motion to

extend an established deadline normally will be denied if the
motion fails to recite that: 1) the additional discovery is
necessary for specified reasons; 2) all parties agree that the
extension will not affect the dispositive motions deadline and
trial date; 3) 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 4) no
party will use the granting of the extension in support of a
motion to extend another date or deadline. The movant
must show that the failure to complete discovery is not the
result of lack of diligence in pursuing discovery. Local Rule
3.09(b). The filing of a motion for extension of time does not
toll the time for compliance with deadlines established by Rule
or Order.
(Doc. 22 at 6). Plaintiff’s motion does not satisfy the requirements of the CMSO.
DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on February 19, 2016.

Copies furnished to Counsel of Record

-2-