MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S PRETRIAL MOTION NO. 1

TED STEWART, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.'s ("LBHI") Pretrial Motion No. 1. For the reasons discussed below, the Court will deny the Motion.

Under the current scheduling order, all dispositive motions were required to be filed by September 4, 2012.1 LBHI filed its "Pretrial Motion" on November 2, 2016, more than four years after the dispositive motion deadline. Though labeled as a "Pretrial Motion," LBHI's Motion is nothing more than an untimely motion for summary judgment.2

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) provides that "[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent." "Demonstrating good cause under the rule `requires the moving party to show that it has been diligent in attempting to meet the deadlines, which means it must provide an adequate explanation for any delay.'"3

LBHI does not attempt to show good cause for its tardy motion, nor could it. Additionally, LBHI has not bothered to seek the Court's consent to either file the Motion or amend the scheduling order. While the Court retains the discretion to manage its own docket, nothing in LBHI's Motion convinces the Court that it should exercise that discretion to relieve it of the terms of the scheduling order.4 The issues raised in LBHI's Motion could have, and should have, been raised previously.5 Instead, LBHI waited until just weeks before trial to file a substantive dispositive motion. The Court cannot condone such behavior. LBHI chose not to seek summary judgment during the allotted time and it must now live with that decision. It is therefore

ORDERED that LBHI's Pretrial Motion No. 1 (Docket No. 123) is DENIED.6