Opinion
20cv1511-MMA-LL
08-12-2021
GLORIE JARAMILLO, Plaintiff, v. TROTT PROPERTIES, LLC; TRINH THI NGUYEN; and DOES 1-10, Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART JOINT MOTION TO AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER REGULATING DISCOVERY AND OTHER PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDINGS [ECF NO. 28]
Honorable Linda Lopez United States Magistrate Judge.
Currently before the Court is the parties' Joint Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order. ECF No. 28. The parties request to continue the remaining dates in the Scheduling Order [ECF No. 15] by approximately ninety (90) to one-hundred and twenty (120) days. ECF No. 28 at 1-2. In support, the parties state they “are still in the process of conducting discovery and working towards a meaningful resolution of this matter.” Id. at 2. The parties further state that “due to scheduling issues, the Independent Medical Examination was not able to proceed, ” and that the parties are still meeting and conferring regarding the next available date for this Medical Examination. Id. Finally, the parties state that they plan to go to a “private mediation, which is set to take place on August 31, 2021.” Id.
For good cause shown, the Joint Motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Court finds good cause to grant the motion, but not for the amount of time requested. Accordingly, the Scheduling Order is amended as follows:
| Deadline | New Deadline |
| September 30. 2021 | |
| Expert Witness Designations | October 29, 2021 |
| Rebuttal Expert Witness Designations | November 5, 2021 |
| Expert Disclosures (Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and (C)) | November 19, 2021 |
| Supplemental Expert Disclosures (Rule 26(a)(2)(D)) | December 3, 2021 |
| Expert Discovery Cutoff | December 13, 2021 |
| Dispositive Pretrial Motions | January 7. 2022 |
| Mandatory Settlement Conference ("MSC") by video conference | January 12, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. PST |
| Confidential MSC Statements | January 4, 2022 |
The Court notes that the fact discovery deadline in this case expired on May 28, 2021 [ECF No. 2], and the parties are requesting an additional five (5) month extension well after their deadline. Similarly, certain deadlines regarding expert discovery have also passed. The Court reminds counsel of their duty to request extensions prior to the expiration of discovery deadlines. Further, the Court will not extend the fact discovery cutoff set forth in the instant order absent extraordinary circumstances that are supported in a declaration by counsel.
All other requirements related to the Scheduling Order remain as previously set. See ECF Nos. 15; 26. As stated in the Scheduling Order, if appropriate, District Judge Anello will issue a pretrial scheduling order setting a pretrial conference, trial date, and all related pretrial deadlines at a later time. ECF No. 15 at 4.
IT IS SO ORDERED.