Nieves-Segura v. Aldi, Inc.

Filing 20

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 18 Motion to extend time for parties to conduct case management conference and file case management report. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas B. Smith on 2/13/2018. (Smith, Thomas)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION ELISET NIEVES-SEGURA, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 6:17-cv-2119-Orl-28TBS ALDI, INC., Defendant. ORDER This case comes before the Court without a hearing on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Enlargement of Time to Effectuate Case Management Conference and Produce Case Management Report (Doc. 18). The motion seeks an extension of 30 days from the date of any order granting it to conduct the initial case management conference and file the parties’ case management report (Id.). As grounds, Plaintiff says the parties were engaged in settlement negotiations which it was hoped, would resolve the case without the need for compliance with the Related Case Order and Track Two Notice (Id.). Rule 16(b)(2) states that “[t]he judge must issue the scheduling order as soon as practicable, but unless the judge finds good cause for delay, the judge must issue it within the earlier of 90 days after any defendant has been served with the complaint or 60 days after any defendant has appeared.” Plaintiff’s rationale, while understandable, does not constitute good cause. No return of service has been filed but, Defendant appeared through counsel on January 5, 2018 (Doc. 7). Consequently, the Court has through March 6, 2018 to comply with Rule 16(b)(2). So that Court has sufficient time to fulfill its responsibility, the motion is GRANTED in part. The parties have through February 23, 2018 to conduct their initial case management conference and file their case management report. DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on February 13, 2018. Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties -2-

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?