IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 22, 2009
BERLIN LILLARD, PLAINTIFF,
STARBUCKS CORPORATION, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge
On November 20, 2008, the parties filed a "Stipulation and Proposed Order to Continue Date for Expert Disclosure" ("Proposed Order"). The parties also indicate they desire more time for discovery. This Proposed Order will not be signed since "good cause" has not been shown, and as stated in the Rule 16 Scheduling Order: "The parties are reminded that pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b), the Status (pretrial scheduling) Order shall not be modified except by leave of Court upon a showing of good cause. Counsel are cautioned that a mere stipulation by itself to change dates does not constitute good cause." Further, the portion of the Proposed Order that indicates the court lacks authority to prescribe when expert disclosure shall occur misstates the law. However, to provide the parties more time for expert disclosure and discovery, the Rule 16 Scheduling Order will be modified but not as the parties have requested since sufficient reason has not been provided to change the trial date. Therefore, the Rule 16 Scheduling Order is modified as follows:*fn1
(1) Each party shall comply expert disclosures authorized under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(2) on or before May 26, 2009;
(2) discovery shall be completed by July 14, 2009;
(3) the last hearing date for motions shall be on September 14, 2009, at 9:00 a.m.; and
(4) the final pretrial conference is set for November 2, 2009, at 2:30 p.m.
IT IS SO ORDERED.