ORDER

ANTHONY E. PORCELLI, Magistrate Judge.

This cause comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion to Extend Time to Conduct the Preliminary Injunction hearing (Doc. 19) and Defendant's Response in Opposition (Doc. 26). Plaintiff fails to establish good cause for its request for extension of time. The Court entered an Order on March 6, 2019, directing the parties to appear before the Court on March 26, 2019, upon Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 6) and Plaintiff's Motion to Expedite Treatment of Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 9). The parties have not jointly moved for a new hearing date as the Court's Order noted would be permissible "to the extent that the parties require additional time prior to the hearing" (Doc. 13)—instead, Plaintiff's Motion is opposed. Plaintiff waited until March 18, 2019, approximately a week before the Preliminary Injunction hearing, to let the Court know of its unavailability. Further, unavailability due to a business trip does not establish good cause. Plaintiff fails to explain whether all three attorneys cannot attend the hearing, or just one. Additionally, based upon the Court's calendar, the Court cannot accommodate Plaintiff's request to move the hearing to April 2, 2019, and would not be able to reschedule the hearing until the week of April 8, 2019.

After consideration, it is hereby

ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff's Motion to Extend Time to Conduct the Preliminary Injunction hearing (Doc. 19) is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED.