From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weinstein v. Katapult Grp.

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jun 27, 2022
21-cv-05175-PJH (N.D. Cal. Jun. 27, 2022)

Opinion

21-cv-05175-PJH

06-27-2022

ANDREW WEINSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. KATAPULT GROUP, INC., Defendant.


ORDER RE: DKT. NO. 61

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, United States District Judge.

The court is in receipt of the parties' stipulation and proposed order amending deadlines previously set by the court. The parties offer no good cause to amend the deadlines. The proposed new deadlines directly contravene the court's pretrial instructions, including the requirement that “All dispositive motions are heard no later than 120 days before trial, unless leave of court is obtained for another deadline.” Dkt. 31 at 2 (emphasis in original). Further, the stipulation violates the procedure for amending the case management order. See Dkt. 31 at 7-8 (“The parties may not modify the pretrial schedule by stipulation” (emphasis in original)). Given the parties' failure to comply with the court's earlier instructions, the court DENIES the stipulation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Weinstein v. Katapult Grp.

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jun 27, 2022
21-cv-05175-PJH (N.D. Cal. Jun. 27, 2022)
Case details for

Weinstein v. Katapult Grp.

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW WEINSTEIN, Plaintiff, v. KATAPULT GROUP, INC., Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jun 27, 2022

Citations

21-cv-05175-PJH (N.D. Cal. Jun. 27, 2022)