General Parts Distribution LLC v. Perry

Filing 154

ORDER denying as moot 114 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery; granting 123 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery; denying 148 Motion to Stay. Counsel is reminded to read the order in its entirety for critical deadlines and information. Signed by US Magistrate Judge James E. Gates on 4/12/2013. (Edwards, S.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
5:12-CV-310-BO
GENERAL PARTS DISTRIBUTION LLC
d/b/a CARQUEST AUTO PARTS, and
GENERAL PARTS, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JENNISON PERRY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

This case comes before the court on three motions concerning the pretrial schedule in this
case: (1) a motion (D.E. 114) by plaintiffs General Parts Distribution LLC d/b/a Carquest Auto
Parts and General Parts, Inc. (collectively “plaintiffs”) to extend the deadline for completion of
all fact discovery set forth in the Scheduling Order (D.E. 55 ¶ 1) for the limited purpose of
allowing plaintiffs to take two depositions; (2) a motion (D.E. 123) by defendant Jennison Perry
(“defendant”) to extend the fact discovery completion deadline for all parties and without
limitation to particular discovery proceedings; and (3) plaintiffs’ motion (D.E. 148) to stay the
dispositive motion deadline (see Sch. Order ¶ 3) pending resolution of outstanding discovery
motions. The motions have been fully briefed (see, respectively, D.E. 115 &121; D.E. 124 &
130; D.E. 149) and referred to the undersigned for determination pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(A) (see 2d Minute Entry dated 3 Apr. 2013 after D.E. 151).
Defendant does not oppose plaintiffs’ motion to allow an extension of the fact discovery
deadline to take the two depositions, but contends that the broader extension sought in his motion

is necessary. Plaintiffs oppose the broader extension. Plaintiffs’ motion to stay the dispositive
motion deadline is unopposed.
The court finds that, in light of the numerous discovery disputes pending in this case,
among other circumstances, good cause exists for the broader extension of the fact discovery
completion deadline defendant seeks and that the extension should be through 3 June 2013. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). However, good cause has not at this point been shown for a stay of the
current dispositive motion deadline of 1 July 2013. That deadline is approximately 30 days after
the extended deadline for completion of all fact discovery provided for herein as well the
deadline for completion of expert discovery, which is also 3 June 2013.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED as follows:
1.

Defendant’s motion (D.E. 123) to extend the fact discovery completion deadline

is ALLOWED.
2.

The deadline for completion of all fact discovery set forth in paragraph 1 of the

Scheduling Order is MODIFIED as follows: all fact discovery shall be commenced in time to be
completed by 3 June 2013.
3.

Plaintiffs’ motion (D.E. 148) to stay is DENIED.

4.

Any potentially dispositive motions shall be filed by 1 July 2013, in accordance

with paragraph 3 of the Scheduling Order.
5.

All other provisions in the existing Scheduling Order remain in effect.

6.

Plaintiffs’ motion (D.E. 114) to extend is DENIED AS MOOT.

2

such appointment after the filing of a new Financial Affidavit which contains the missing
information.
This order shall be filed under seal.

SO ORDERED, this the 12th day of April 2013.
SO ORDERED, this 23rd day of May 2011.

_________________________
James E. Gates
United States Magistrate Judge

3