Nam v. 7-Eleven

Filing 36

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER amending the Scheduling Order; Status Report now due: 2/26/2016. Signed by Judge Roger W Titus on 11/6/2015. (kns, Deputy Clerk) Modified to include (c/m on 11/6/2015).(kns, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

DJIBY NAM,
Plaintiff
v.
365 DAYS, INC. d/b/a 7-ELEVEN,
Defendant.

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

Case No.: RWT 13cv546

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

On February 20, 2013, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, initiated this case by filing a
Complaint. ECF No. 1. On December 23, 2014, this Court entered a Scheduling Order. ECF
No. 20. The Order required that discovery be completed by May 7, 2015, and that parties file a
status report on that date. Id. at 1–2. It further required that all motions for summary judgment
be filed on or before June 8, 2015. Id. at 2. The Order stipulated that “[n]o changes in the
schedule set forth herein will be permitted, unless authorized by the Court for good cause
shown.” Id. To date, the parties have neither completed discovery nor made any of the filings
required by the Scheduling Order, nor have they shown good cause for their failure to so act.
“A schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The parties here have shown complete disregard for the Scheduling Order in
their failure to complete discovery or make any of the required filings.1 Given that the original

1

On October 27, 2015, Magistrate Judge Day, to whom this case was referred for discovery, entered an Order
denying Plaintiff’s most recent motion to compel and for sanctions, and noting that the parties had failed to follow
local and federal rules governing discovery. ECF No. 35 at 4.

scheduling dates have long since passed, the Court will amend the Scheduling Order on its own
motion.
Parties are cautioned that these deadlines will not again be extended, and that any further
violations of the Scheduling Order may result in sanctions, including the imposition of fees and
costs, striking of pleadings, dismissal of the action, rendering of a default judgment against the
disobedient party, or treatment of the failure to obey an order as contempt of court. Fed R. Crim.
P. 16(f), 37(b)(2)(A)(ii)-(vii).
Accordingly, it is this 6th day of November, 2015, by the United States District Court for
the District of Maryland, ORDERED that the following schedule shall control the progress of
the case:
Date
February 26, 2016

February 26, 2016

March 25, 2016

Action
Deadline for all depositions and other discovery.
Parties shall file a status report discussing: (1) whether or not discovery
has been completed; (2) whether or not any motions are pending; (3)
whether or not any party intends to file motions; (4) the anticipated
length of trial; and (5) the possibility that the case will be settled.
Deadline for filing any motions for summary judgment and supporting
papers.

/s/
ROGER W. TITUS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2