Bond v. Fluke Corporation

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: May 19, 2023
• Docket: 2:22-cv-01241
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 10 PAMELA BOND, individually and on CASE NO. 22-cv-1241 MJP behalf of all others similarly situated, 11 ORDER DENYING STIPULATED Plaintiffs, MOTION TO EXTEND 12 SCHEDULING ORDER v. 13 FLUKE CORPORATION and FLUKE 14 MANUFACTURING CORPORATION, 15 Defendants. 16

17 This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ Stipulated Motion to Extend the 18 Scheduling Order. (Dkt. No. 32.) The parties ask the Court to set aside the current trial date and 19 case deadlines in order to “tailor a case schedule that meets their needs for flexibility.” (Motion 20 at 2.) Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) states that “a schedule may be modified only for 21 good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “Rule 16(b)’s ‘good cause’ 22 standard primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment.” Johnson v. 23 Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). “[T]he focus of the inquiry is 24 1 upon the moving party’s reasons for seeking modification” and “[i]f that party was not diligent, 2 the inquiry should end.” Id. (citation omitted). The Court held a hearing with the parties to 3 discuss whether good cause existed to support their Motion. (Dkt. No. 33.) The parties failed to 4 identify any good cause that might possibly sustain their request to set aside the trial date and

5 interim deadlines. There is no record of diligence and no valid reason presented to support an 6 extension. The Court DENIES the Motion without prejudice. 7 The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel. 8 Dated May 19, 2023. A 9 10 Marsha J. Pechman United States Senior District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24