Webb v. Arstrat, LLC

Filing 18

ORDER that 16 Stipulation re Discovery Deadlines is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 2/14/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 10 LILIANA WEBB, 11 Plaintiff(s), 12 v. 13 ARSTRAT, LLC, 14 Defendant(s). 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:17-cv-01226-JCM-NJK ORDER (Docket No. 16) 16 Pending before the Court is a stipulation for a 69-day extension of the discovery cutoff, and 17 subsequent deadlines. Docket No. 16. The stipulation is premised on a deponent’s indication (two 18 weeks ago) that it could not appear for the deposition as scheduled on February 5, 2018. Id. at 1-2. The 19 stipulation also indicates that the deponent is not available before the discovery cutoff, which is today. 20 Id. at 2. The stipulation provides no date on which the deponent is available, and provides no 21 justification for a 69-day extension. 22 Depositions are routinely scheduled with ten-days’ notice or less. See, e.g., Reddy v. Precyse 23 Solutions LLC, 2015 WL 2081429, at *3 (E.D. Cal. May 4, 2015) (“courts generally find that one week 24 to ten days’ notice is reasonable” (collecting cases)). The parties have provided no justification why they 25 need more than two months to conduct a deposition that was first noticed several weeks ago. 26 Accordingly, the stipulation is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The discovery cutoff is 27 28 1 EXTENDED to February 28, 2018 only with respect to the identified deposition.1 The deadlines for 2 dispositive motions and the joint proposed pretrial report remain unchanged.2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 DATED: February 14, 2018 5 ______________________________________ NANCY J. KOPPE United States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 The stipulation refers cryptically to “additional discovery.” Docket No. 16 at 3. No showing has been made that an extension is appropriate with respect to any discovery other than the identified deposition. 2 The stipulation fails to comply with the local rules in several respects, including failing to identify with particularity the discovery that has been completed to date. See Local Rule 26-4(a). Failure to comply with the applicable rules in the future may result in summary denial of a request. 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?