Opinion
2:21-cv-02129-GMN-NJK
01-31-2023
PLAYUP, INC., Plaintiffs, v. DR. LAILA MINTAS, Defendants.
ORDER [DOCKET NO. 294]
Nancy J. Koppe United States Magistrate Judge
Pending before the Court is Counter-Defendants' motion to extend deadlines in the scheduling order. Docket No. 294. Counter-Plaintiff filed a response in opposition. Docket No. 297. The Court does not require a reply or a hearing. See Local Rule 78-1.
The papers reference various discovery disputes beyond the extensions being requested. The Court expresses no opinion herein as to those discovery disputes.
A request to extend unexpired deadlines in the scheduling order must be premised on a showing of good cause. Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(4); Local Rule 26-3. The good cause analysis turns on whether the subject deadlines cannot reasonably be met despite the exercise of diligence. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992).
Counter-Defendants seek a roughly 30-day extension based on, inter alia, co-lead trial counsel's emergency medical issues, which required surgery in mid-January and are expected to impact her ability to work through the end of February. See Docket No. 294-1 at ¶ 4.
For good cause shown, the motion to extend is GRANTED as stated below. Deadlines are hereby RESET as follows:
• Amend pleadings/ add parties: closed
• Initial experts: March 15, 2023
• Rebuttal experts: April 14, 2023
• Discovery cutoff: May 15, 2023
• Dispositive motions: June 15, 2023
• Joint proposed pretrial order: July 14, 2023, or 30 days after resolution of dispositive motions
The Court has adjusted the schedule to account for concerns as to the short timeframe between initial experts and rebuttal experts. See Docket No. 297 at 5.
The discovery cutoff is extended for the purpose of rebuttal experts and taking expert depositions only. The discovery cutoff as currently set (April 3, 2023) otherwise applies. See Docket No. 237 at 1.
IT IS SO ORDERED.