Opinion
1:21-cv-01134-DAD-SAB
12-22-2021
DORIS ANDERSON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF FRESNO, et al., Defendants.
ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANTS CALIFORNIA FORENSIC MEDICAL GROUP AND H.I.G. CAPITAL LLC, AND CONTINUING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE TO MARCH 28, 2022 (ECF NOS. 19, 20, 23)
Plaintiffs initiated this action on July 26, 2021 against Defendants California Forensic Medical Group (“C.M.F.G.”), H.I.G. Capital LLC (“H.I.G.”), County of Fresno, Margaret Mims (“Mims”), and David Pomaville (“Pomaville”). Pomaville was subsequently dismissed from the action. (ECF No. 15.) After two extensions of time to respond to the complaint and continuances of the scheduling conference, the scheduling conference was set for January 27, 2022. (See ECF Nos. 12, 13, 18, 19.) On December 1, 2021, Plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint, naming new Defendants Jami Carter, Chris Garcia, Frank Ponce, Moises Franco, Meng Cha, Linda Thao, Ka Her, Anthony Sanchez, Rachel LeBoeuf, David Ventura, Dillon Owens, Jose Alanis, Jonathan Sanchez, Genevieve Garcia, and Maria Guerrero. (ECF No. 20.) Summons issued as to the new Defendants on December 6, 2021, and their responses to the first amended complaint are due December 27, 2021; none of the new Defendants have yet appeared in this action. (ECF No. 22.)
Pursuant to the Court's prior order, the deadline for Defendants C.M.F.G., H.I.G., County of Fresno, and Mims to respond to the first amended complaint is December 22, 2021. (ECF No. 19.)
On December 21, 2021, Plaintiffs and Defendants C.M.F.G. and H.I.G. filed a stipulated request to extend the time for C.M.F.G. and H.I.G. to file a response to the first amended complaint, from December 22, 2021 to January 31, 2022. (ECF No. 23.) These parties proffer that they are currently in the process of meeting and conferring regarding responses to the first amended complaint and seek an extension so as to avoid potentially unnecessary law and motion. (Id.) Defendants County of Fresno and Mims did not join this stipulated request.
The parties are reminded that requests to modify the briefing schedule that are made on the eve of a deadline or thereafter will be looked upon with disfavor and may be denied absent a showing of good cause for the delay in seeking an extension. If such a request is made after a deadline, the party seeking the nunc pro tunc extension must show additional good cause as to why the matter was filed late.
Nevertheless, based upon a review of the parties' stipulation for an extension of time, the Court finds good cause to grant the extension and to extend Defendants C.M.F.G. and H.I.G.'s deadline to file a response to the first amended complaint. The request was not made in bad faith and the stipulated relief requested by the parties is warranted. However, the parties are reminded that any failures to comply with their filing deadlines may result in sanctions pursuant to Local Rule 110. The Court further notes that, as Defendants County of Fresno and Mims did not join the stipulated request, their responses to the first amended complaint are still due by December 22, 2021. In light of this order, the Court shall also continue the scheduling conference, currently set for January 27, 2022.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The deadline for Defendants California Forensic Medical Group and H.I.G. Capital, LLC to file a responsive pleading to the first amended complaint is extended to January 31, 2021;
2. All other defendants' responsive pleading deadlines remain unchanged;
3. The Scheduling Conference set for January 27, 2022, is continued to March 28, 2022, at 1:30 p.m.; and
4. The parties shall file a joint scheduling report seven (7) days prior to the scheduling conference.
IT IS SO ORDERED.