Lindsay McCarthy v. Lincoln National Life Insurance Company
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Allison H. Goddard (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint motion to extend the deadline to notify the court of a discovery dispute by approximately one month. The court granted the motion, setting a new deadline of September 30, 2026, for the parties to raise any disputes regarding Plaintiff's first set of Requests for Production.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Joint Motion to Extend Deadline to Notify Court of Discovery Dispute granted“The Court GRANTS the parties’ motion to extend the discovery dispute deadline.” | agree with court The court applied the 'good cause' standard required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) and the local chamber rules. The parties represented that they needed additional time to meet and confer and investigate issues to resolve the dispute amicably. This representation satisfies the requirement of acting diligently to meet the original deadlines and provides a valid reason for the extension. The extension is reasonable in scope (30 days) and consistent with the goal of judicial economy. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly identifies the applicable legal standard (good cause under Rule 6(b)) and cites appropriate Ninth Circuit authority defining that standard. It applies the standard to the facts presented (parties' need to meet and confer and investigate) and grants a reasonable extension. The reasoning is concise but sufficient for a procedural scheduling order.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LINDSAY MCCARTHY, Case No.: 3:25-cv-03213-BTM-AHG 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 v. MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO NOTIFY COURT OF 14 LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE DISCOVERY DISPUTE INSURANCE COMPANY, 15 Defendant. [ECF No. 29] 16 17 18 19 Before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to continue the deadline notify the Court 20 of a discovery dispute. ECF No. 29. The parties seek an order from the Court extending 21 their deadline to raise a discovery dispute by approximately one month. Id. 22 Parties seeking to continue deadlines set forth by the Court must demonstrate good 23 cause. FED. R. CIV. P. 6(b) (“When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the 24 court may, for good cause, extend the time”); Chmb.R. at 2 (stating that any request for 25 continuance requires “[a] showing of good cause for the request”). “Good cause” is a non- 26 rigorous standard that has been construed broadly across procedural and statutory contexts. 27 Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause 28 standard focuses on the diligence of the party seeking to amend the scheduling order and | reasons for seeking modification. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 2 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (“[T]he focus of the inquiry is upon the moving party’s reasons 3 ||for seeking modification. . . . If that party was not diligent, the inquiry should end.’’) 4 || Gnternal citation omitted). Therefore, “‘a party demonstrates good cause by acting diligently 5 meet the original deadlines set forth by the court.” Merck v. Swift Transp. Co., No. CV- 6 || 16-01103-PHX-ROS, 2018 WL 4492362, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 19, 2018). 7 Here, the parties represent to the Court that they need more time to meet and confer 8 ||regarding Defendant’s responses to Plaintiff's first set of Requests for Production. ECF 9 29. Specifically, the parties need more time to investigate the issues raised. □□□ at 2. 10 || The parties explain that they seek to “work[] out an amicable resolution of the issues to 11 ||obviate the need for court intervention.” Jd. As such, the parties request an approximate 12 30-day extension, to September 30, 2026, to raise the discovery disputes with the Court. /d. 13 The Court appreciates that the parties are working together to resolve their disputes 14 || without judicial intervention. Upon due consideration of the parties’ motion and the fact 15 || discovery cutoff, the Court GRANTS the parties’ motion to extend the discovery dispute 16 || deadline. Thus, the parties must bring any discovery disputes related to Plaintiff's first set 17 Requests for Production to the Court’s attention in the manner described in Paragraph 2 18 || of the Scheduling Order, (see ECF No. 23 at 2), no later than September 30, 2026. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 Dated: August 28, 2026 _ Siow. Xion Honorable Allison H. Goddard 22 United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28