Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Curevo, Inc. v. Choe, C19-0572RSL. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20190730g02 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jul. 29, 2019
Latest Update: Jul. 29, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO EXPEDITE AND MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING DATES ROBERT S. LASNIK , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on defendant's "Motion to Expedite Order Amending Scheduling Dates" (Dkt. # 27) and "Motion to Modify Scheduling Dates" (Dkt. # 28). The motions are DENIED. Absent extraordinary circumstances not present here, a motion to continue deadlines may be noted for consideration no earlier than the second Friday after filing. LCR 7(d)(2). Even if the Court we
More

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO EXPEDITE AND MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING DATES

This matter comes before the Court on defendant's "Motion to Expedite Order Amending Scheduling Dates" (Dkt. # 27) and "Motion to Modify Scheduling Dates" (Dkt. # 28). The motions are DENIED. Absent extraordinary circumstances not present here, a motion to continue deadlines may be noted for consideration no earlier than the second Friday after filing. LCR 7(d)(2). Even if the Court were to consider defendant's motion to extend the Rule 26(f) and

Joint Status Report deadlines on its merits, defendant has not made a showing of good cause as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A). A pending motion to dismiss does not automatically stay discovery or other case management deadlines, and defendant's personal jurisdiction argument is not weighty enough to justify such a stay (as will be more fully explicated in a separate order).

The parties shall, within seven days of the date of this Order, submit their combined Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan.

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