Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Newspin Sports, LLC v. Blast Motion, Inc., 18-cv-02273-BEN (JLB). (2020)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20200226906 Visitors: 9
Filed: Feb. 25, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 25, 2020
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF DISCOVERY MOTION [ECF No. 48] JILL L. BURKHARDT , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is the parties' Joint Motion to Extend the Deadline for Filing of Discovery Motions. (ECF No. 48.) On January 13, 2020, Defendants served their responses to Plaintiff's First Set of Requests for Production and Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories. ( See id. at 3.) On January 22, 2020, Plaintiff served its responses to Defendants
More

ORDER GRANTING IN PART JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FOR FILING OF DISCOVERY MOTION

[ECF No. 48]

Before the Court is the parties' Joint Motion to Extend the Deadline for Filing of Discovery Motions. (ECF No. 48.) On January 13, 2020, Defendants served their responses to Plaintiff's First Set of Requests for Production and Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories. (See id. at 3.) On January 22, 2020, Plaintiff served its responses to Defendants' First Set of Requests for Production and Defendants' First Set of Interrogatories. (See id.) The parties presently seek an extension of time until March 20, 2020 to bring any discovery dispute before the Court with respect to these discovery responses.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Defendants' Responses to Plaintiff's Discovery

Pursuant to Judge Burkhardt's Civil Chambers Rules, the parties were required to begin meeting and conferring regarding Defendants' responses no later than January 27, 2020. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. § IV(A). The parties did not meet and confer until February 3, 2020. (See ECF No. 48 at 3.) Therefore, the parties' meet and confer efforts were untimely with respect to Defendants' responses.

The parties were also required to bring any dispute concerning Defendants' responses to the Court's attention "no later than 30 calendar days after the date upon which the event giving rise to the dispute occurred." See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. §§ IV(A), (B), (E). With respect to Defendants' responses, the parties failed to bring any dispute to the Court's attention before the applicable deadline of February 12, 2020. Rather, the parties waited and filed the present motion for an extension of time on February 13, 2020. If the parties needed additional time to bring the dispute to the Court's attention, they were required to request an extension of time no less than 10 calendar days in advance of the deadline at issue. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. § IV(A). The parties did not do so. Therefore, the present joint motion for extension of time is untimely with respect to Defendants' responses.

B. Plaintiff's Responses to Defendants' Discovery

Pursuant to Judge Burkhardt's Civil Chambers Rules, the parties were required to begin meeting and conferring regarding Plaintiff's responses no later than February 5, 2020. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. § IV(A). The parties represent in their joint motion that they do not plan to meet and confer regarding Plaintiff's responses until February 17, 2020. (See ECF No. 48 at 3.) Therefore, the parties' meet and confer efforts were also untimely with respect to Plaintiff's responses.

With respect to Plaintiff's responses, the parties were required to bring any dispute concerning the responses to the Court's attention by February 21, 2020. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. §§ IV(A), (B), (E). If the parties determined that they needed additional time, as they have, they were required to file a joint motion to extend time no later than February 11, 2020. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. §§ IV(A). The parties did not file the present motion until February 13, 2020. Therefore, the current request for an extension of time until March 20, 2020 is untimely.

II. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

Despite the parties' failure to follow this Court's Civil Chambers Rules and to address excusable neglect for their untimeliness in the pending joint motion, the Court will consider the joint motion in the interests of justice.

The parties represent that they plan to meet and confer regarding their outstanding discovery disputes on February 17, 2020. (ECF No. 48 at 3.) Following this date, the parties request nearly five additional weeks to bring any remaining disputes before the Court. (See id. at 3-4.) The parties assert that this additional time would provide the parties with "the opportunity to resolve any remaining disputes after each party provides its supplements and to resolve other aspects of document production or, if necessary, seek Court intervention." (Id. at 4.)

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the parties have established good cause for an extension, but not for an extension of the length requested. Accordingly, the joint motion is GRANTED IN PART. Any discovery disputes regarding Plaintiff's responses and Defendants' responses to the above-listed discovery must be brought to the attention of the Court in accordance with Judge Burkhardt's Civil Chambers Rules no later than March 16, 2020.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer