Hoffman v. Hearing Help Express Inc

Filing 109

ORDER denying without prejudice the Parties' 108 Stipulated Motion to Modify Expert Related Deadlines in Scheduling Order. Signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (PM)

Download PDF
Case 3:19-cv-05960-MJP Document 109 Filed 01/07/21 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 MARK HOFFMAN, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 CASE NO. C19-5960 MJP v. ORDER DENYING STIPULATED MOTION TO AMEND CASE SCHEDULE HEARING HELP EXPRESS INC, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 This matter comes before the Court on the Parties’ Stipulation and Order to Modify 18 Expert Related Deadlines in Scheduling Order. (Dkt. No. 108.) Having reviewed the Stipulation, 19 Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend Deadline to Submit Expert Testimony (Dkt. No. 107), and related 20 materials on the docket, the Court DENIES the Stipulated Motion without prejudice. 21 The Parties failed to provide any argument or attestation in the Stipulation to demonstrate 22 “good cause” to extend the case schedule. See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 23 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). This alone is fatal to the stipulation. But the Court has also reviewed 24 Plaintiff’s Motion to Extend, which sets forth the apparent basis for the Parties’ request. While ORDER DENYING STIPULATED MOTION TO AMEND CASE SCHEDULE - 1 Case 3:19-cv-05960-MJP Document 109 Filed 01/07/21 Page 2 of 2 1 the Court appreciates the interest of the Parties to respond to the anticipated decision from the 2 Supreme Court in the matter of Duguid v. Facebook, No. 19-51 (argued Dec. 8, 2020), the 3 Parties have not proposed a viable amended schedule. Specifically, the Parties propose August 5, 4 2021 as the deadline to file dispositive motions, while maintaining a trial date of November 1, 5 2021. This would allow roughly two months for the Court to consider and resolve any such 6 dispositive motions before trial. This is inadequate. Should the Parties wish to propose a new 7 stipulated request to extend the deadlines to provide for expert deadlines related to the Duguid 8 matter, they must allow at least four months from the date of dispositive motion filings to trial. 9 To the extent this requires a new proposed trial date, the Parties should be aware that the Court’s 10 current schedule will not allow for a new trial date until after April 11, 2022. 11 The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel. 12 Dated January 7, 2021. 13 A 14 Marsha J. Pechman United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ORDER DENYING STIPULATED MOTION TO AMEND CASE SCHEDULE - 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?