Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

RAMIREZ v. WALGREEN CO., 2:16-cv-00506-APG-NJK. (2016)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20160425921 Visitors: 13
Filed: Apr. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 22, 2016
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a discovery plan, Docket No. 12, which is hereby DENIED. The presumptively reasonable discovery period is 180 days from the date of the first defendant's appearance. See Local Rule 26-1(e)(1). The parties seek additional time without providing any showing of good cause for that extension. Cf. Local Rule 26-1(d) (requiring a statement of why a longer period is sought). In addition, the parties misstate the timing req
More

ORDER

Pending before the Court is a discovery plan, Docket No. 12, which is hereby DENIED. The presumptively reasonable discovery period is 180 days from the date of the first defendant's appearance. See Local Rule 26-1(e)(1). The parties seek additional time without providing any showing of good cause for that extension. Cf. Local Rule 26-1(d) (requiring a statement of why a longer period is sought). In addition, the parties misstate the timing requirements for requesting extensions pursuant to Local Rule 26-4, which requires that any request to extend deadlines set forth in the scheduling order must be submitted at least 21 days before the subject deadline. For example, any request to extend the deadline for initial expert disclosures must be filed at least 21 days before the expiration of that deadline. Such a request filed only 29 days before the discovery cut-off would be untimely. The parties shall file an amended discovery plan in compliance with the local rules no later than April 26, 2016.

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