Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

WEEKS v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, 1:13-cv-01641-AWI-JLT. (2014)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20141217961 Visitors: 7
Filed: Dec. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 16, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION TO MODIFY THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER Doc. 23 JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Trevor Weeks and Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company submit the following stipulation to modify the Court's pretrial Scheduling Order. (Doc. No. 11). On January 23, 2014, the Court issued a Scheduling Order with deadlines for non-expert and expert discovery. (Doc. No. 11). On October 9, 2014, the Court signed a stipulated Order extending non-expert discovery cut-off until Decemb
More

STIPULATION TO MODIFY THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

Doc. 23

JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Trevor Weeks and Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company submit the following stipulation to modify the Court's pretrial Scheduling Order. (Doc. No. 11).

On January 23, 2014, the Court issued a Scheduling Order with deadlines for non-expert and expert discovery. (Doc. No. 11). On October 9, 2014, the Court signed a stipulated Order extending non-expert discovery cut-off until December 31, 2014. (Doc. No. 22). On December 4, 2014, Defendant began taking Plaintiff's deposition, but was unable to complete the deposition in one day. Due to commitment over the upcoming Christmas holiday as well as commitments in other cases, the parties are unable to schedule a time to finish Plaintiff's deposition until January 2015. The parties are meeting and conferring for the date to complete Plaintiff's deposition in early January 2015. As such, the parties respectfully request the Court extend the non-expert discovery deadline to January 31, 2015. This extension will not affect any of the other pretrial deadlines the Court set in this case.

ORDER

Based upon the stipulation of the parties, the Court ORDERS:

1. The stipulation (Doc. 23) is GRANTED. The non-expert discovery deadline is extended to January 31, 2015;

2. No other modifications to the case schedule are authorized.

Absolutely no further requests to modify the scheduling order will be permitted.1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. When the Court last granted the stipulation to amend the scheduling order, it stated in the order, "No other deadlines set forth in the scheduling order are authorized to be amended. Further, counsel are advised that no further requests to modify the scheduling order will be entertained absent a showing of exceptional good caused. They are urged in the strongest of terms to complete the needed discovery as soon as possible." (Doc. 22 at 3) In granting the stipulation here, the Court does not mean to imply that this showing has been made; it has not. However, because of the crucial nature of the completion of Plaintiff's deposition, the Court will allow this final amendment to the case schedule.
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