Diamond X Ranch, LLC v. Atlantic Richfield Company

Filing 114

ORDER re 111 Motion to Modify Scheduling Order. The court concurs with Plaintiff that a new deadline for amending pleadings or adding parties should be adopted and any motions to effect such amendments, shall be made by November 6, 2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 6/30/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9
10
11
12
13

DIAMOND X RANCH LLC,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________________)

3:13-cv-00570-MMD-WGC
ORDER
re: Doc. # 111

14
15

Before the court is the motion of Plaintiff Diamond X Ranch LLC (Diamond) to modify the

16

Scheduling Order. Diamond seeks to adjust the deadlines for completion of discovery, amending

17

pleadings/adding parties and disclosure of experts/rebuttal experts. (Doc. # 111.)

18

Defendant Atlantic Richfield Company (Atlantic Richfield) has responded. Atlantic Richfield

19

does not oppose Diamond’s request to modify the deadlines for completion of discovery/expert

20

disclosures. However, Atlantic Richfield does oppose any extensions for amending the pleadings or

21

adding parties. (Doc. # 112.)

22

Diamond has replied and argues that due to the unique procedural and factual questions inherent

23

in this litigation the deadline for amending the pleadings or adding parties should be extended as well.

24

(Doc. # 113.)

25

Agreed Upon Extensions

26

Due to the parties’ concurrences, the following deadlines are imposed:

27

Fact Discovery Deadline:

December 18, 2015

28

Disclosure of Experts:

January 15, 2016

1

Disclosure of Rebuttal Experts:

March 18, 2016

2

Expert Discovery Deadline:

May 16, 2016

3

Dispositive Motions Deadline:

July 15, 2016

4

Joint Pretrial Order:

August 16, 2016.

5

If a dispositive motion is filed, the Joint Pre-Trial Order shall be due thirty (30) days

6

after a decision on the dispositive motion.

7

Disputed Extensions: Amending the Pleadings or Adding Parties

8

As discussed above, the parties dispute whether the court should modify the deadlines for

9

amending the pleadings or adding parties. In view of the unique nature of this case, the various motions

10

which are pending (see, e.g., Docs. ## 76, 87, 97, and the parties’ “notices at Docs. ## 109 and 110), the

11

lack of prejudice to Atlantic Richfield (which has yet to file an answer and/or counterclaim (if any) to

12

Plaintiff’s complaint), the court finds that there is good cause to also amend the deadlines for amending

13

the pleadings or to add parties.1

14

At the last status conference, after discussing the complicated procedural status of this case, the

15

court stated it “recognizes further modification to the scheduling order may be necessary.” (Doc. # 108.)

16

The court made specific reference to the outstanding motion for leave to amend (Doc. # 97) which may

17

very well impact the outstanding motion to dismiss (Doc # 87). Id.

18

Therefore, the court concurs with Plaintiff that a new deadline for amending the pleadings or

19

adding parties should be adopted and any motions to effect such amendments, shall be made by

20

November 6, 2015.2

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22

DATED: June 30, 2015.

23

___________________________________
WILLIAM G. COBB
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

24
25
1

26
27
28

As Diamond points out, it is “not currently moving the amend its complaint, but is seeking to “preserve” its right
to do so pending a favorable disposition of its recently-filed water rights claim with the Water Master. (Doc. # 113 at 3.)
2

The court further observes, however, that additional amendments or revisions to the scheduling order will likely
be sought by one or both of the parties. The court is not prejudging those possible amendments but just commenting on the
inevitability of them.

2