Macpherson v. Amica Mutual Insurance Company

Filing 28

ORDER denying without prejudice 26 Motion to extend time. The parties have not satisfied the requirements of Rules 6 and 16. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith on 11/21/2017. (Smith, Thomas)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
CAROL MACPHERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 6:17-cv-563-Orl-40TBS

AMICA MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Defendant.
ORDER
This case comes before the Court without a hearing on the parties’ Joint Motion to
Extend Discovery Deadline and Expert Witness Disclosure Deadlines (Doc. 26).
The parties seek an extension of the deadline for Plaintiff to make her expert
witness disclosures. Because that deadline passed before the motion was filed Plaintiff
must show excusable neglect. FED. R. CIV. P. 6(b)(1)(B). She has not made this showing.
The parties are asking the Court to modify the Case Management and Scheduling
Order (“CMSO”) which governs the case. This requires satisfaction of the good cause
requirement in 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 Systems, Inc., 133 F.3d 1417, 1418 (11th Cir. 1998) (quoting
FED. R. CIV. P. 16 advisory committee note). “’If [a] party was not diligent, the [good
cause] inquiry should end.’” Id. (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d
604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). The CMSO informed the parties that: “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).” (Doc. 15 at 6).
As grounds for their motion, the parties state that Defendant’s expert orthopedic
surgeon was not available to perform a compulsory medical examination of Plaintiff prior
to December 13, 2017, and that Plaintiff requires more time to determine the treating
physicians she will rely on and disclose to Defendant (Id., ¶¶ 3-4). The parties have failed
to show that they have been diligent and that these things could not have been
accomplished within the deadlines established in the CMSO.
For these reasons, the motion is DENIED without prejudice. The parties may refile
their motion if they can satisfy the requirements of Rules 6 and 16.
DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on November 21, 2017.

Copies furnished to Counsel of Record

-2-