STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO COMPLETE DISCOVERY

(FIRST REQUEST)

PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.

COME NOW, the parties above named, by and through counsel, and move the Honorable Magistrate Judge for an Order continuing Discovery, and submit the instant Stipulation in accordance with LR 6-1 and LR 26-4. The parties hereto previously completed expert discovery according to the initial expert disclosures on December 3, 2018, according to the Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order on file herein (Doc #13), no extension of the expert disclosures dates is contemplated by this stipulation and the parties hereto do not agree to extend any expert disclosure dates. Thus, as past discovery deadlines in this matter pursuant to the Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order on file herein (Doc #13) remain closed. Further, the parties anticipate timely disclosure of rebuttal experts as outlined within the Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order on file herein (Doc #13), and no extension of that date is sought within the instant Stipulation. However, the parties have conferred and agree that an extension of time in which to complete all remaining discovery (and specifically complete depositions) is warranted, good cause exists for the extension.

The parties hereby request that the remaining discovery dates in this matter be continued for ninety (90) days. The primary basis for the scope of a ninety-day extension is the fact that Dr. Rosler's office advised that he is not available for deposition until mid-April 2019. Dr. Rosler is Mr. Garcia's treating pain management physician and administered the invasive and alleged accident-related treatment to Mr. Garcia in this case. This Stipulation and request for extension of dates is made more than twenty-one (21) days before the expiration of the discovery deadline (sought to be extended) pursuant to the deadlines for discovery contained within the Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order on file herein (Doc #13). This Stipulation is supported by good cause. No previous requests or extensions for time in which to complete discovery in this matter have been requested in this case.

The parties hereto are cognizant of the Honorable Magistrate Judge, Peggy A. Leen's Minute Order (Doc #15), indicating that no extensions of the dates for discovery contained within the Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order on file herein (Doc #13) would be granted without a strong showing of good cause and due diligence (Minute Order, Doc #15).

Counsel submits there is a strong showing of good cause and due diligence, as counsel has been working to set necessary depositions and obtain necessary documents identified for the first time during Plaintiff's recent deposition, but has been informed by deponents (and specifically Drs. Rosler and Kaplan) that no dates are available for deposition until after the current deadline for discovery. In order to complete necessary discovery, counsel is requesting additional time in which to accomplish depositions of experts, treating physicians and percipient witnesses, and obtain newly identified documents and records. Counsel continues to work diligently to set said depositions and obtain relevant records, but requires additional time in which to do so.

In addition, on November 19, 2018, Defendant deposed Plaintiff, Anthony Garcia. On that date, Plaintiff revealed for the first time that he sought consult from his primary care physician who authored Family Medical Leave Act paperwork authorizing Mr. Garcia to be off work, allegedly in connection with a back injury Mr. Garcia claims as related to the motor vehicle accident at issue in this case. Moreover, Defendant has been diligent in its efforts to obtain Mr. Garcia's employment records. However, Mr. Garcia employer has not provided those records to date. Thus, the parties need time in which to explore these additional issues with respect to Plaintiff's claims, obtain necessary records and conduct necessary depositions of relevant parties in connection with Mr. Garcia's claims of continuing injury.

An extension of time for discovery is necessary and good cause exists for the extension pursuant to Local Rule 26-4. In accordance with Local Rule 26-4(c), such extension is warranted so that Defendant may notice necessary depositions to include Plaintiff's physicians and experts, and Plaintiff's employer, and obtain complete employment and FMLA records regarding Mr. Garcia's claim of accident-related back pain, as well as new medical records identified by Mr. Garcia, for the first time, during his deposition. An extension is also warranted and good cause exists because Defendant has been diligent in its efforts to set the depositions and obtain the employment documents, but has not yet been given the opportunity to notice necessary depositions, and to enable the parties to gather evidence necessary in which to support any request for dispositive relief in this matter, and so that the parties may adequately prepare their case in anticipation of trial.

Further, in accordance with Local Rule 26-4(c), Plaintiff Garcia disclosed and testified about additional necessary and discoverable information regarding alleged ongoing injury during his November 19, 2018 deposition. The parties have agreed that an extension of the discovery dates are warranted making an extension of time immediately necessary. Counsel continue to work together to complete necessary depositions and discovery. Thus, the instant Stipulation to extend the remaining dates for discovery for sixty (60) days as requested herein is necessary and warranted, with a strong showing of good cause and due diligence by counsel.

In accordance with Local Rule 26-4 (a): Discovery that has been completed includes written discovery by the parties, including Requests for Production of Documents, Interrogatories and Requests for Admissions. Further, Defendant State Farm has deposed Plaintiff Anthony Garcia. Counsel is currently working together to scheduling remaining depositions as noted herein. Significantly, no extension of the dates for expert disclosures are contemplated in this case and expert discovery and other discovery dates that have passed are to otherwise remain closed.

Also, the parties executed a Stipulation and Order for Confidentiality, and the Court the Court signed the Order on the same (Document #19). Finally, the parties have exchanged documents and witnesses pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(1).

In accordance with Local Rule 26-4(b): Discovery to be completed includes factual discovery and depositions. Otherwise, the parties do not wish to re-open expert discovery, which remains closed — and no extension of pending rebuttal date is contemplated by this Stipulation.

In accordance with Local Rule 26-4(d): The parties request an extension and that remaining discovery be continued for ninety (90) days. Specifically, that the discovery deadline be continued through May 2, 2019, and the parties shall have until July 31, 2019 (30 days after the discovery cut-off date) to file dispositive motions. Finally, the parties will prepare a consolidated pre-trial order on or before August 30, 2019 (which deadline will be suspended if dispositive motions are timely filed, until thirty (30) days after the decision of the dispositive motions or until further order of the Court).

ORDER

The court is not satisfied that the parties have shown good cause for a 90-day extension of the discovery plan and scheduling order deadlines. The parties have conducted very little discovery and do not provide the dates on which the discovery which has been done was initiated. However, as the parties represent two of the medical experts are not available to have their depositions taken until April 2019, the court will reluctantly grant the stipulation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.