Reel v. Johnson
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Lupe Rodriguez (author)
Analysis
The court considered the parties' joint motion to amend the scheduling order to continue discovery deadlines and a settlement conference. The court granted the motion, finding good cause based on a computer system failure and agreed-upon document exchanges, and set a telephonic case management conference.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Joint Motion to Amend Scheduling Order Regarding Discovery Deadlines and Follow-up Settlement Conference granted“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion.” | agree with court The court applied the correct standard under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4) and Ninth Circuit precedent (Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc.) requiring good cause and diligence. The order recites specific facts (computer failure, agreed document exchange) that support a finding of good cause and diligence, making the decision consistent with the law and the record. |
Telephonic Case Management Conference set for November 22, 2023“Additionally, the Court sua sponte SETS a telephonic Case Management Conference on November 22, 2023, at 9:00 a.m.” | agree with court The court has broad discretion to manage its docket and set case management conferences. The order notes the conference is set sua sponte, which is a standard procedural action to monitor the amended schedule. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly identifies the applicable legal standard for modifying a scheduling order and applies it to the specific facts presented in the joint motion. The reasoning is concise but sufficient for a procedural order of this nature.
How this analysis was made · dispute it
inconsistent with cited authorityOpinion
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. 47]; AND 17 (2) SETTING A TELEPHONIC 18 CASE MANAGEMENT 19 CONFERENCE 20 Currently before the Court is the parties’ “Joint Motion and Stipulation to Continue 21 Discovery Deadlines and Settlement Conference,” in which the parties ask the Court to 22 modify several events in the current scheduling order, including: (1) continue the fact 23 discovery deadlines by approximately two months, (2) continue some expert discovery 24 deadlines by approximately one month, and (3) continue the follow-up settlement 25 conference, currently scheduled for August 16, 2023, by approximately two months. 26 (ECF No. 47.) This is the parties’ first request to amend the scheduling order. 27 To demonstrate good cause to continue these events, Plaintiff’s counsel explains 28 1 that her law firm’s computer systems suffered a catastrophic failure, which “delayed 2 [P]laintiff’s ability provide the bulk of his document production.” (ECF No. 47 at 2.) 3 Additionally, the parties note that they have agreed to exchange additional documents, 4 which will require time to review, setting back the discovery process as it is currently 5 scheduled. (See id.) The parties request that the events in listed in the scheduling order 6 be modified as follows: 7 Event Current Proposed Deadline 8 Deadline/Scheduled 9 Time Fact Discovery deadline September 22, 2023 November 17, 2023 10 Written discovery July 21, 2023 September 15, 2023 11 (interrogatories, requests 12 for admission, document production requests) 13 Follow-up Settlement August 16, 2023, at October 11, 2023, at 14 Conference 9:30 a.m. 9:30 a.m. Expert Designation October 20, 2023 November 17, 2023 15 Exchange of Rebuttal November 3, 2023 December 1, 2023 16 Experts 17 Expert Disclosure December 1, 2023 January 5, 2023 18 Supplemental Disclosure December 15, 2023 January 19, 2023 19 20 (See id. at 3.) 21 A scheduling order “may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s 22 consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). This good cause standard “primarily considers the 23 diligence of the party seeking the amendment. The district court may modify the pretrial 24 schedule ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the 25 extension.’” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) 26 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee’s notes and collecting cases). “If that party 27 was not diligent, the inquiry should end.” Id. 28 Based on the foregoing, the Court finds good cause to amend the scheduling order 1 || with respect to these events only. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion. 2 || Additionally, the Court sua sponte SETS a telephonic Case Management Conference on 3 || November 22, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. Plaintiff's counsel is ORDERED to arrange the joint 4 to Judge Rodriguez’s chambers at (760) 339-4250. As a summary, 5 Court modifies the scheduling order as follows: 6 Event Current Amended Date 7 Deadline/Scheduled Time 8 Fact Discovery deadline September 22, 2023 November 17, 2023 ? Written discovery July 21, 2023 September 15, 10 (interrogatories, requests 2023 for admission, document V1 production requests) 12 Follow-up Settlement August 16, 2023, at 9:30 | October 11, 2023, 13 Conference a.m. at 9:30 a.m. Expert Designation October 20, 2023 November 17, 2023 Exchange of Rebuttal November 3, 2023 December 1, 2023 15 Experts 16 Expert Disclosure December 1, 2023 January 5, 2023 7 Supplemental Disclosure December 15, 2023 January 19, 2023 18 Telephonic Case N/A November 22, Management Conference 2023, at 9:30 a.m. 19 20 All other deadlines and requirements from the Court’s scheduling order (ECF No. 21 ||38) remain unchanged. 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 ||Dated: July 19, 2023 24 25 / L 26 Honorable Lupe Rodriguez, Jr. 7 United States Magistrate Judge 28