Filed: Feb. 14, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 14, 2020
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER FRANK H. McCARTHY , Magistrate Judge . Both sides have filed motions to extend or modify the current Scheduling Order to permit additional discovery. 1 Plaintiff has also filed a motion to take additional depositions. 2 The issues have been fully briefed and a telephone hearing was held on February 7, 2020. In broad terms both sides contend they have diligently conducted discovery but have been unable to complete necessary discovery within the current deadline because
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER FRANK H. McCARTHY , Magistrate Judge . Both sides have filed motions to extend or modify the current Scheduling Order to permit additional discovery. 1 Plaintiff has also filed a motion to take additional depositions. 2 The issues have been fully briefed and a telephone hearing was held on February 7, 2020. In broad terms both sides contend they have diligently conducted discovery but have been unable to complete necessary discovery within the current deadline because o..
More
OPINION AND ORDER
FRANK H. McCARTHY, Magistrate Judge.
Both sides have filed motions to extend or modify the current Scheduling Order to permit additional discovery.1 Plaintiff has also filed a motion to take additional depositions.2 The issues have been fully briefed and a telephone hearing was held on February 7, 2020.
In broad terms both sides contend they have diligently conducted discovery but have been unable to complete necessary discovery within the current deadline because of actions or inaction of the other side or non-parties. The responses generally question the diligence of the other side, the relevance of additional discovery, and seek to deny or limit the other sides' requested discovery.
The court is persuaded that both sides have been reasonably diligent in their discovery efforts. The court is also persuaded that the general areas of additional party and non-party discovery set forth in the motions are relevant for discovery purposes and necessary for a fair resolution of the case on its merits. The court therefore finds good cause to extend the current Scheduling Order.
Although the parties request a thirty or sixty day extension, the court finds that a ninety day extension of all dates is more realistic. Each side may take ten additional depositions. A separate Scheduling Order will be entered.
The court expects a high level of cooperation between the parties to complete the discovery process. If disputes arise which cannot be resolved by good faith efforts of the parties, appropriate motions shall be promptly filed. Responses shall be filed within seven days, and replies within three days.
Defendants' First Motion for an Extension to Complete Third-Party Fact Discovery, [Dkt. 198], Relator's Expedited Motion for Leave to Depose Defendants' Likely Trial Witnesses, [Dkt. 201], and Relator's Motion to Modify Scheduling Order to Extend Discovery by Thirty Days, [Dkt. 232], are hereby GRANTED as set forth herein. The briefing schedule for future discovery matters is altered as further set forth herein.
SO ORDERED.
