Filed: Feb. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER Striking Maloney's Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment [59] RONALD S.W. LEW , Senior District Judge . Currently before the Court is Defendant/Cross Defendant/Counter Claimant Araceli Maloney's ("Maloney") Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment ("Motion") [59]. Having reviewed all papers submitted pertaining to this Motion, the Court NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS: the Court STRIKES Maloney's Motion. I. BACKGROUND The filing deadline for motio
Summary: ORDER Striking Maloney's Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment [59] RONALD S.W. LEW , Senior District Judge . Currently before the Court is Defendant/Cross Defendant/Counter Claimant Araceli Maloney's ("Maloney") Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment ("Motion") [59]. Having reviewed all papers submitted pertaining to this Motion, the Court NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS: the Court STRIKES Maloney's Motion. I. BACKGROUND The filing deadline for motion..
More
ORDER Striking Maloney's Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment [59]
RONALD S.W. LEW, Senior District Judge.
Currently before the Court is Defendant/Cross Defendant/Counter Claimant Araceli Maloney's ("Maloney") Motion for Summary Judgment or Partial Summary Judgment ("Motion") [59]. Having reviewed all papers submitted pertaining to this Motion, the Court NOW FINDS AND RULES AS FOLLOWS: the Court STRIKES Maloney's Motion.
I. BACKGROUND
The filing deadline for motions was February 6, 2018. Nevertheless, and without moving to modify the Court's Scheduling Order [34], Maloney filed the instant Motion [59] on February 20, 2018.
II. DISCUSSION
A. Legal Standard
A scheduling order "may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent." In re W. States Wholesale Nat. Gas Antitrust Litig., 715 F.3d 716, 737 (9th Cir. 2013)(quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4)). "Good cause" primarily concerns the diligence of the party seeking to modify the scheduling order. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). Prejudice to the opposing party might supply additional reasons for denying the modification. Id.
B. Analysis
Even if Maloney had moved to modify the Scheduling Order, there is no good cause for filing this Motion late. Maloney and Defendant/Counter Claimant/Counter Defendant Bambi Gicana ("Gicana") met and conferred on January 2, 2018, and Maloney even filed her Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [54] on the last day of the filing deadline. If Maloney had acted diligently, she also would have filed the instant Motion within the deadline. Since Maloney was not diligent, the inquiry ends, and the Court need not inquire into Gicana's prejudice. Id.
Because Maloney ignored the deadline, the Motion is STRICKEN. The Court will only consider Maloney's Opposition to Gicana's Motion for Summary Judgment ("Opposition") [59]. Maloney shall not file any further documentation regarding her Opposition or stricken Motion.
III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Court STRIKES Maloney's Motion [59].
IT IS SO ORDERED.
