GW Grundbesitz AG v. Gunn

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4

5 GW GRUNDBESITZ AG, Case No. 2:21-cv-02074-CDS-NJK 6 Plaintiff, Order 7 v. [Docket No. 23] 8 LEZLIE GUNN, 9 Defendant. 10 Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation to extend the discovery cut-off date by 11 three months. Docket No. 23. The parties submit that this extension is necessary to conduct a 12 deposition in Switzerland, which requires a six-week approval process, as well as respond to 13 already-propounded written discovery. Id. at 2. 14 A request to extend discovery deadlines must include a statement specifying the discovery 15 completed, a specific description of the discovery that remains, the reasons why the subject 16 deadline cannot be met, and a proposed schedule for completing the outstanding discovery. Local 17 Rule 26-3. The request must also be supported by a showing of good cause. Id. If the request is 18 being made after the expiration of a subject deadline, a showing of excusable neglect is also 19 required. Id. The good cause analysis turns on whether the subject deadlines cannot reasonably 20 be met despite the exercise of diligence. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 21 609 (9th Cir. 1992). This showing of diligence is measured by the movant’s conduct throughout 22 the entire period of time already allowed. CC.Mexicano.US, LLC v. Aero II Aviation, Inc., 2015 23 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169110, at *11-12 (D. Nev. Dec. 15, 2015). If diligence is not established, the 24 Court’s inquiry should end. Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609 (internal citation omitted.). 25 The Court finds that the parties have not been diligent in conducting discovery. The 26 Court’s scheduling order issued on March 16, 2022. Docket No. 19. The parties submit that no 27 discovery was conducted until June 3, 2022, and provide no explanation for this lack of diligence. 28 Docket No. 23 at 2. However, due to the importance of the remaining discovery and as a one-time 1} courtesy in the interest of having this case decided on its merits, the Court GRANTS the parties’ 2|| request.' The discovery deadlines are EXTENDED as follows: 3 e Discovery cut-off: October 31, 2022 4 e Dispositive motions: November 30, 2022 5 e Joint pre-trial order: December 30, 2022, 30 days after the resolution of dispositive 6 motions, or further Court order. 7 NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: July 1, 2022 fe 10 M1 UNITED STATES iAGISTRATE JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ' To be clear, the parties should already have responded to all previously propounded written discovery. The failure to do so demonstrates a lack of diligence. Nonetheless, in an effort 26] to resolve this case on its merits, the Court is allowing the continuance for the deposition in Switzerland, the parties to respond to previously propounded written discovery, and any responses 27| from third parties. The Court is specifically DENYING the request as to any “discovery that may be needed after Defendant files her Answer to the Complaint and is deposed.” Docket No. 23 at