Opinion
No. 08 CV 2381 JCW
01-09-2012
RAASHAD CARTER, Plaintiff, v. L. CANNEDY, et al., Defendants.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING
ORDER (DKT. 74)
On January 6, 2012, Defendants filed a Motion to Modify the Scheduling Order (dkt. 74). Defendants seek an extension of the dispositive motion deadline in order to secure the signature of a declarant, assemble and copy exhibits, and enable supervisory review.
This motion is DENIED. Defendants' reasons for seeking an extension are foreseeable and do not show diligence. Thus, Defendants have not shown good cause for an extension under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b). See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607-09 (9th Cir. 1992) (the primary consideration in Rule 16(b)'s good cause determination is the "diligence of the party seeking the amendment" to the court's schedule).
____________
J. Clifford Wallace
United States Circuit Judge