Port of Seattle v. Wang

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: February 18, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-00735
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 AT SEATTLE 10 11 PORT OF SEATTLE, CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00735-TL 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ON MOTION FOR v. EXTENSION 13 DONALD WANG, 14 Defendant. 15

17 This matter is before the Court on Defendant Donald Wang’s Motion for Extension of 18 Time and for Continuance to Conduct Discovery. Dkt. No. 20. Having considered Plaintiff’s 19 response (Dkt. No. 21) and the relevant record, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART 20 Defendant’s motion. 21 This case is currently set for trial in September 2025. Dkt. No. 11. The discovery 22 deadline is currently set for April 10, 2025. Id. Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment on 23 January 15, 2025 (Dkt. No. 12), to which Defendant did not respond. However, in the Joint 24 1 Status Report filed by the parties, Defendant noted his opposition to Plaintiff filing a summary 2 judgment prior to the discovery cutoff date. Dkt. No. 10 at 4. 3 One day after Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was due, 4 Defendant moved for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s motion for summary

5 judgment and to complete discovery. Dkt. No. 20. He asserts that due to an unrelated arrest on 6 May 1, 2024, he was unable to leave the State of California until January 2025 and thus was 7 unable to conduct adequate discovery or respond to the pending motion. See Dkt. No. 20 at 1–2. 8 Defendant additionally moves to continue the trial date in this case. Id. at 1. 9 The Court has broad discretion to grant a time extension for good cause, especially when 10 sought in advance of the deadline. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). As with all civil procedural rules, the 11 Court is required to “liberally construe[ Rule 6(b)(1)] to effectuate the general purpose of seeing 12 that cases are tried on the merits.” Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th 13 Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Rodgers v. Watt, 722 F.2d 456, 459 (9th 14 Cir. 1983)). Such requests for time extensions are “normally . . . granted in the absence of bad

15 faith on the part of the party seeking relief or prejudice to the adverse party.” Id. at 1259 (internal 16 quotation marks and citation omitted). 17 Upon a review of the record, the Court FINDS that an extension is appropriate. Allowing 18 Defendant an extension of time to respond to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment will 19 permit him the ability to complete discovery, which it appears was hindered by his unrelated 20 probation in California. An extension also will allow the Court the ability to rule on the pending 21 motion for summary judgment with the benefit of full briefing by both Parties and the full 22 development of the factual record. 23 As the deadline for Defendant to complete discovery is April 10, 2025 (Dkt. No. 11),

24 Defendant shall be permitted until that date to complete discovery as detailed in his motion and 1 supporting declaration (Dkt. No. 20). However, the Court does not find good cause to extend the 2 trial in this case, as none of the deadlines set out in the Court’s order setting the bench trial date 3 and related dates (Dkt. No. 11) will be impacted by the instant extension. 4 Therefore, the Court ORDERS as follows:

5 1. Defendant’s motion for an extension to respond to the pending motion for 6 summary judgment is GRANTED: 7 a. The parties SHALL complete discovery by April 10, 2025. 8 b. Defendant SHALL file his response to Plaintiff’s pending motion for 9 summary judgment (Dkt. No. 12) by May 1, 2025. 10 c. Plaintiff SHALL file its reply by May 8, 2025. 11 d. The Clerk is DIRECTED to renote Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment 12 to May 8, 2025. 13 2. Defendant’s motion to continue the trial date is DENIED. All deadlines except for 14 the dispositive motions date in the case scheduling order at Docket No. 11 remain

15 in effect. 16 Dated this 18th day of February 2025. 17 A 18 Tana Lin United States District Judge 19

21 22 23 24