ORDER

CATHY SEIBEL, District Judge.

On August 26, 2019, the parties in the above-captioned case appeared before me for an initial conference, (Minute Entry dated 8/26/2019), and I signed a Case Management Plan setting discovery deadlines, (see Doc. 12). On November 26, 2019, the parties jointly submitted a motion requesting a 90-day extension for all deadlines set at the initial conference. (Doc. 13.) That same day, I granted the extension and directed Plaintiff's counsel to "promptly submit a proposed Amended Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order." (Doc. 14.)

On February 7, 2020 — 73 days later — Plaintiff's counsel submitted an Amended Case Management Plan proposing discovery deadlines well beyond the 90-day extension I granted. (Doc. 15.) For example, the new deadline for service of Requests to Admit would be 311 days later than the original deadline. (Compare Doc. 12 at 2, with Doc. 15 at 1.) The fact discovery cutoff is extended 161 days and the expert discovery deadline 178 days. (Compare Doc. 12 at 1-2, with Doc. 15 at 1-2.) Further, the Amended Case Management Plan does not propose new deadlines for the additional discovery provisions in the original Case Management Plan. (Compare Doc. 12 at 5, with Doc. 15.)

Not only did counsel ignore my November 26, 2019 Order by failing to promptly submit an Amended Case Management Plan, but the parties have given themselves extensions far exceeding the 90 days granted in my Order.1 While I am tempted to hold the parties to the deadlines in the original Case Management Plan, I will allow them the 90-day extension granted on November 26, 2019, provided that Plaintiff's counsel submits by Tuesday, February 11, 2020, a proper Amended Case Management Plan in which no deadline extends 90 days past the deadlines set in the original Case Management Plan.

SO ORDERED.