Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Advance Polybag (Nevada), Inc.

Filing 18

ORDER denying 17 Proposed Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order, Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 11/29/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
9
10

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY,

11
Plaintiff(s),
12
v.
13
ADVANCE POLYBAG (NEVADA), INC.,
14
Defendant(s).
15

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:17-cv-02077-RFB-NJK
ORDER
(Docket No. 17)

16

Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend all of the deadlines in the scheduling order

17

by 90 days. Docket No. 17. Requests to extend the deadlines set by the scheduling order must be

18

supported by a showing of good cause. See, e.g., Local Rule 26-4. Good cause exists if the subject

19

deadline “cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Johnson

20

v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 409 (9th Cir. 2000). The pending stipulation identifies

21

the “reasons” for the extension request as the mere fact that more time is desired for discovery. Docket

22

No. 17 at 2. This is not sufficient for any extension, let alone one seeking to enlarge the discovery

23

period by a whopping 50% only a month after the parties represented that they needed only 180 days to

24

complete discovery. See Docket No. 14. Instead, the parties must provide “[t]he reasons why the

25

deadline was not satisfied or the remaining discovery was not completed within the time limits set by

26

the discovery plan.” Local Rule 26-4. Merely identifying a desire for additional time to conduct

27

discovery does not provide a reason why an extension is needed; instead the parties must explain why

28

it is they are unable to meet the schedule already established by the Court.

1

Moreover, with respect to the deadline to amend the pleadings, that deadline expired prior to the

2

filing of the stipulation. See Docket No. 15 at 2. In addition to failing to identify good cause to extend

3

that deadline, the stipulation fails to show the excusable neglect required to resuscitate an expired

4

deadline. See, e.g., Local Rule 26-4.

5

Accordingly, the stipulation to extend is DENIED without prejudice.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

DATED: November 29, 2017

8
9

______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2