From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilmore v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 21, 2010
No. CIV S-09-02180 JAM DAD (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2010)

Opinion


JEREMY GILMORE, , Plaintiffs, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, , Defendants. No. CIV S-09-02180 JAM DAD United States District Court, E.D. California. December 21, 2010

          ORDER

          DALE A. DROZD, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiffs have filed a motion to compel defendant Union Pacific Railroad to produce Locomotive Engine No. 9643 for inspection in Roseville, California by the end of January 2011 and to produce documents related to that engine. (Doc. No. 140.) Plaintiffs have noticed this motion for hearing on January 14, 2011.

         The Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Order issued in this case on January 5, 2010, required that all discovery be "completed" by December 10, 2010. (Doc. No. 24 at 3.) By Stipulation and Order filed October 12, 2010, the deadline for completion of discovery was extended to January 14, 2011. (Doc. No. 89.) In the context of discovery, "completed' means that all discovery shall have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been complied with." (Doc. No. 24 at 3.)

         In noticing a discovery motion for hearing on the deadline for completion of discovery, plaintiffs have failed to conduct discovery so that all disputes relative to discovery will have been resolved by appropriate order and all such orders will have been complied with by the January 14, 2011 deadline. Accordingly, plaintiffs' motion to compel (Doc. No. 140) is denied as untimely and will be dropped from the court's January 14, 2011 calendar. Denial is without prejudice to re-filing only if discovery in this action is further extended.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Gilmore v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 21, 2010
No. CIV S-09-02180 JAM DAD (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2010)
Case details for

Gilmore v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

Case Details

Full title:JEREMY GILMORE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, et…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Dec 21, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-09-02180 JAM DAD (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2010)