Castelan-Gutierrez v. Bodega Latina Corporation

Filing 22

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 21 Stipulation; Discovery due by 4/4/2018. Motions due by 5/4/2018. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 6/4/2018. The deadline to amend the pleadings remains December 1, 2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 11/28/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 10 MARIA M. CASTELAN-GUTIERREZ, 11 Plaintiff(s), 12 v. 13 BODEGA LATINA CORPORATION, 14 Defendant(s). 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:17-cv-01877-JAD-NJK ORDER (Docket No. 21) 16 Pending before the Court is an amended stipulation to extend all of the deadlines in the 17 scheduling order by 60 days. Docket No. 21.1 Requests to extend the deadlines set by the scheduling 18 order must be supported by a showing of good cause. See, e.g., Local Rule 26-4. Good cause exists if 19 the subject deadline “cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” 20 Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 409 (9th Cir. 2000). For the reasons discussed 21 below, the stipulation is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. 22 With respect to the upcoming deadline to amend the pleadings, the stipulation provides no 23 reason of any kind why that deadline should be extended. Accordingly, this aspect of the stipulation is 24 DENIED, and the deadline to amend the pleadings remains December 1, 2017. 25 26 27 28 1 20. The initial stipulation was denied without prejudice for failure to establish good cause. Docket No. 1 With respect to the subsequent deadlines, the parties contend that they have been unable to 2 schedule Plaintiff’s deposition until mid-December and are still in the process of obtaining her medical 3 records. Docket No. 21 at 4. The stipulation further indicates that there is insufficient time between that 4 deposition and the current deadline for initial expert disclosures. See id. The root cause for the delays 5 in this case was Plaintiff’s failure to provide a HIPAA authorization for more than three months after 6 it was first requested. See id. That is not a good reason to extend deadlines. Moreover, while the 7 stipulation contends that the 15-day period between Plaintiff’s deposition and the deadline for initial 8 expert disclosures is insufficient, it fails to explain why the parties need an additional 60 days to 9 complete expert reports. See id. As a one-time courtesy to the parties, the Court will extend the initial 10 expert deadline (and subsequent deadlines) by 30 days, which will be sufficient time to prepare expert 11 reports. Accordingly, this aspect of the stipulation is GRANTED in part, and deadlines are SET as 12 follows: 13 • Initial experts: February 1, 2018 14 • Interim status report: February 1, 2018 15 • Rebuttal experts: March 5, 2018 16 • Discovery cutoff: April 4, 2018 17 • Dispositive motions: May 4, 2018 18 • Joint proposed pretrial order: June 4, 2018 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 DATED: November 28, 2017 21 22 ______________________________________ NANCY J. KOPPE United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?