Ohio Security Insurance Company v. Hi-Tech Aggregate, LLC

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided February 8, 2024·No. 2:23-cv-01094·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

OHIO SECURITY INSURANCE Case No. 2:23-cv-01094-JAD-NJK COMPANY, et al.,

Plaintiffs, ORDER

v. [Docket No. 42]

HI-TECH AGGREGATE, LLC, et al., Defendants. Pending before the Court is the parties’ stipulation to extend case management deadlines by 90 days. Docket No. 42. A request to extend unexpired deadlines in the scheduling order must be premised on a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); Local Rule 26-3. The good cause analysis turns on whether the subject deadlines cannot reasonably be met despite the exercise of diligence. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). This showing of diligence is measured by the movant’s conduct throughout the entire period of time already allowed. See, e.g., Muniz v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 731 F. Supp. 2d 961, 967 (N.D. Cal. 2010). If diligence is not established, the Court’s inquiry should end. Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609 (internal citation omitted). Here, the parties have not demonstrated diligence. The parties submit that, now that Plaintiffs’ motion to stay discovery has been resolved, Plaintiffs’ have agreed to supplement their written discovery responses and proceed with the needed discovery. Docket No. 42 at 4. Essentially, the parties granted themselves a stay of discovery pending resolution of Plaintiffs’ motion and now request a 90-day extension. Such conduct does not establish diligence. Accordingly, the Court cannot find good cause for the extension request and the inquiry ends. Given that this is the parties’ first extension request, however, the Court will grant a 60- day extension as a one-time courtesy. During this time, the parties must diligently conduct 1} discovery. Accordingly, the stipulation to extend case management deadlines is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Docket No. 42. The deadlines are RESET as follows: Rebuttal Expert: February 15, 2024 Discovery Cut-Off: May 13, 2024 Dispositive Motions: June 12, 2024 Joint Pretrial Order: July 12, 2024, 30 days after the resolution of dispositive motions, or further Court order. Pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, any request for extension of any deadline must be made no 10] later than 21 days prior to the expiration of the subject deadline and must be supported by good 11} cause. Dated: February 8, 2024 7 KN x. Id Unitel Sis 3s M agistrate Judge

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

Ohio Security Insurance Company v. Hi-Tech Aggregate, LLC, (D. Nev. 2024).

Ohio Security Insurance Company v. Hi-Tech Aggregate, LLC (Ohio Security Insurance Company v. Hi-Tech Aggregate, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Muniz v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
731 F. Supp. 2d 961 (N.D. California, 2010)