Mojtehedi v. Durante

Opinion

2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 4 * * * 5 Helen Mojtehedi, Case No. 2:23-cv-00402-JCM-DJA 6 Plaintiff, 7 Order v. 8 Chrisian Durante dba and aka Durante 9 Insurance and Financial Services also dba and aka Durante Agency, et al., 10 Defendants. 11 12 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to extend discovery deadlines. (ECF No. 38). 13 Plaintiff explains that her counsel proposed a 75-day extension to Defendant. Defendant 14 countered with a 45-day extension. Plaintiff’s counsel offered a compromise of a 60-day 15 extension but has yet to hear back from Defendant. The Court will grant a 60-day extension. See 16 Little v. City of Seattle, 863 F.2d 681, 685 (9th Cir. 1988) (“[t]he district court has wide discretion 17 in controlling discovery”). 18 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to extend (ECF No. 38) is 19 granted in part and denied in part. The following deadlines shall govern discovery: 20 Discovery cutoff: February 9, 2024 21 Dispositive motions: March 11, 2024 22 Joint pretrial order: April 9, 20241 23 24 DATED: November 22, 2023 DANIEL J. ALBREGTS 25 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 27 1 Under Local Rule 26-1(b)(5), if dispositive motions are filed, the deadline for fling the joint pretrial order will be suspended until 30 days after decision on the dispositive motions or further