Cortes-Reyes v. Carrasco

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedMay 12, 2025
Docket2:25-cv-00323
StatusUnknown

This text of Cortes-Reyes v. Carrasco (Cortes-Reyes v. Carrasco) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cortes-Reyes v. Carrasco, (D. Nev. 2025).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 MARIA DEL CARMEN CORTES-REYES, 8 Case No.: 2:25-cv-00323-GMN-NJK Plaintiff, 9 Order v. 10 [Docket No. 11] ENRIQUE HERRERA CARRASCO, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation to extend case management deadlines 14 by 90 days. Docket No. 13. 15 A request to extend unexpired deadlines in the scheduling order must be premised on a 16 showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); Local Rule 26-3. The good cause analysis turns 17 on whether the subject deadlines cannot reasonably be met despite the exercise of diligence. 18 Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992).1 19 A request to extend case management deadlines must provide a “statement specifying the 20 discovery completed.” Local Rule 26-3. To allow the Court to make a proper determination of 21 whether the parties have been diligent throughout the discovery period, this statement must include 22 the dates on which all discovery occurred. Such information is absent here. See Docket No. 11 at 23 2. Therefore, the Court cannot determine whether the parties have been diligent.2 24 25 1 That a request is jointly submitted “neither mandates allowance of the extension sought 26 nor exempts parties from making the necessary showings to justify that relief. Failure to provide such showings may result in denial of a stipulated request to extend the case management 27 deadlines.” Williams v. James River Grp. Inc., 627 F. Supp. 3d 1172, 1178 (D. Nev. 2022). 28 2 Further, one of the reasons the parties seek relief is because they are “discussing setting a mediation.” Id. at 3. It is well-settled that the existence of settlement talks or alternative dispute ] Accordingly, the stipulation is DENIED without prejudice. Docket No. 11. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 Dated: May 12, 2025 4 PSS BEE cox Koppe 5 United-States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27), ——__________ resolution is generally insufficient to establish good cause for extension of the case management 28] deadlines. Williams., 627 F. Supp. 3d at 1181.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Cortes-Reyes v. Carrasco, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cortes-reyes-v-carrasco-nvd-2025.