Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

M.B. ex rel. Beverly v. California, 2:17-cv-02395 WBS DB. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180418906 Visitors: 9
Filed: Apr. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 17, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE [PROPOSED] ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . A scheduling conference in this case is currently set for May 7, 2018. (ECF No. 13.) Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and Local Rule 143, the parties, through their counsel of record, agree to and request a continuance of the scheduling conference to June 7, 2018, or a similar date convenient for the Court. A scheduling order may be modified only upon a showing of good cau
More

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SCHEDULING CONFERENCE [PROPOSED] ORDER

A scheduling conference in this case is currently set for May 7, 2018. (ECF No. 13.) Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and Local Rule 143, the parties, through their counsel of record, agree to and request a continuance of the scheduling conference to June 7, 2018, or a similar date convenient for the Court.

A scheduling order may be modified only upon a showing of good cause and by leave of Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), 16(b)(4); see, e.g., Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609. In considering whether a party moving for a schedule modification has good cause, the Court primarily focuses on the diligence of the party seeking the modification. Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 16 advisory committee's notes of 1983 amendment).

The instant stipulation is necessitated by the fact that the attorney who had been acting as defense counsel has been re-assigned and is no longer involved in this case. The new defense counsel recently assigned to handle this case will require some time to conduct their own review and investigation of this matter so that they may effectively advise the Defendants and engage in a meaningful Rule 26(f) conference. Furthermore, the Defendants' motion to dismiss was recently granted in large part, Plaintiffs were provided leave to amend, and no operative complaint is yet on file. (ECF No. 19.) Lastly, one of Plaintiffs' attorneys is currently out of the country.

Based on the foregoing, the parties stipulate as follows: the scheduling conference currently set for May 7, 2018, is continued to June 7, 2018, or a similar date convenient for the Court. At least twenty-one calendar days before the scheduling conference is held, the parties shall confer and attempt to agree upon a discovery plan. The parties shall submit to the Court a joint status report fourteen calendar days before the scheduling conference.

ORDER

Good cause appearing, the parties' stipulation to continue the scheduling conference is GRANTED. The scheduling conference currently set for May 7, 2018, is continued to June 18, 2018 at 1:30 p.m. At least twenty-one (21) calendar days before the scheduling conference is held, the parties shall confer and attempt to agree upon a discovery plan. The parties shall submit to the Court a joint status report no later than June 4, 2018.

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