Reel v. Johnson

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. California
DecidedJanuary 9, 2024
Docket3:22-cv-00526
StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook
Reel v. Johnson, (S.D. Cal. 2024).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AARON REEL, Case No.: 22cv526-W(LR)

12 Plaintiff, ORDER: 13 v. (1) GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO AMEND SCHEDULING 14 CITY OF EL CENTRO, et al., ORDER REGARDING 15 Defendants. DISCOVERY DEADLINES AND FOLLOW-UP SETTLEMENT 16 CONFERENCE [ECF No. 55]; 17 (2) VACATING TELEPHONIC 18 CASE MANAGEMENT 19 CONFERENCE

20 Currently before the Court is a “Joint Motion and Stipulation to Continue 21 Discovery Deadlines and Pre-trial Dates,” in which the parties ask the Court to continue 22 the remaining deadlines and events in the Court’s scheduling order by approximately 23 three months. (ECF No. 55.) This is the parties’ second request to amend the scheduling 24 order. 25 To demonstrate good cause for the requested continuance, the parties note that 26 Plaintiff’s counsel sustained injuries from a fall that broke her dominant wrist and 27 continues to experience complications that make it difficult for her to participate in the 28 1 discovery process, especially given that the close of fact discovery is approaching. (See 2 id. at 2.) The Court held an informal discovery conference (“IDC”) in this matter on 3 January 2, 2024 after Plaintiff’s counsel brought her medical issues and their resulting 4 impact to the discovery deadlines to its attention. (See ECF No. 54.) Counsel for the 5 defendants in this case did not object to a continuance of the discovery deadlines during 6 the IDC, and confirm that they have no objections in the joint motion. (See ECF No. 55 7 at 2.) The parties accordingly request that the remaining discovery deadlines and 8 hearings in the scheduling order be modified as follows: 9 10 Event Current Proposed Deadline 11 Deadline/Scheduled 12 Time Fact Discovery deadline January 12, 2024 April 11, 2024 13 Follow-up Settlement January 24, 2024, at April 23, 2024 14 Conference 9:30 a.m. 15 Expert Designation January 5, 2024 April 4, 2024 16 Exchange of Rebuttal January 19, 2024 April 18, 2024 Experts 17 Mandatory Settlement March 13, 2024, at 9:30 June 11, 2024 18 Conference (“MSC”) a.m. Confidential Settlement March 6, 2024 June 4, 2024 19 Briefs for the MSC 20 Expert Disclosure February 23, 2024 May 23, 2024 21 Supplemental Disclosure March 8, 2024 June 6, 2024 22 Expert Discovery Deadline March 29, 2024 June 27, 2024 23 Pretrial Motions Filing April 26, 2024 July 25, 2024 Cutoff 24 Pre-trial Disclosures July 8, 2024 October 4, 2024 25 Meet and Confer about July 15, 2024 October 11, 2024 26 Pretrial Conference 27 Proposed Pretrial Order to July 22, 2024 October 20, 2024 Opposing Counsel 28 1 Proposed Final Pretrial July 29, 2024 October 25, 2024 Conference Order served 2 an lodged; objections to 3 Pretrial Disclosure Informal Letter Briefs to August 7, 2024 by 2:30 November 5, 2024 by 4 Judge’s Chambers p.m. 2:30 p.m. 5 Final Pretrial Conference August 12, 2024, at November 11, 2024 6 10:30 a.m. at 10:30 a.m. 7 8 (See id. at 3-5.) 9 A scheduling order “may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s 10 consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). This good cause standard “primarily considers the 11 diligence of the party seeking the amendment. The district court may modify the pretrial 12 schedule ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the 13 extension.’” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) 14 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee’s notes and collecting cases). “If that party 15 was not diligent, the inquiry should end.” Id. 16 Based on the foregoing, the Court finds good cause to amend the remaining 17 deadlines and hearings in the scheduling order. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the 18 parties’ joint motion (ECF No. 55.) Additionally, the Court sua sponte VACATES the 19 telephonic Case Management Conference, currently set for January 10, 2024, at 9:00 20 a.m. (See ECF No. 50 at 2.) As a summary, the Court modifies the scheduling order as 21 follows: 22 23 Event Current Amended Date 24 Deadline/Scheduled Time 25 Telephonic Case January 10, 2024 at 9:30 VACATED 26 Management Conference a.m. (ECF No. 50) 27 Fact Discovery deadline January 12, 2024 (ECF April 12, 2024 28 No. 52) 7 Conference a.m. (ECF No. 52) 9:30 a.m. Expert Designation January 5, 2024 (ECF April 5, 2024 BetPseeten ee Experts No 52.)

6 a.m. (ECF No. 52) 9:30 a.m. Confidential Settlement March 6, 2024 (ECF No. June 5, 2024 et rset MRSS | ane No. 52)

l 52) No. 52)

Cutoff 52) 14 52) 15 Pretrial Conference 52) Opposing Counsel 52) 2024 7 Proposed Pretrial July 29, 2024 (ECF No. November 18 18 Conference Order Served 52) 2024 and Lodged with district 19 judge

district judge’s chambers p.m. (ECF No. 52) 2024, by 2:30 p.m. Final Pretrial Conference August 12, 2024, at December 2, 2024, | PseatConenes | gittum ECPNo.52) | Sar 23 || All other requirements from the Court’s scheduling order (ECF No. 38) remain in effect. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 ||Dated: January 9, 2024 ( 7 26 Honorable Lupe Rodriguez, Jr. 27 United States Magistrate Judge 28

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Reel v. Johnson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reel-v-johnson-casd-2024.