UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 9, 2012
L. CANNEDY, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Clifford Wallace United States Circuit Judge
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER (DKT. 74)
On January 6, 2012, Defendants filed a Motion to Modify the Scheduling Order (dkt. 74). Defendants seek an extension of the dispositive motion deadline in order to secure the signature of a declarant, assemble and copy exhibits, and enable supervisory review.
This motion is DENIED. Defendants' reasons for seeking an extension are foreseeable and do not show diligence. Thus, Defendants have not shown good cause for an extension under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b). See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607--09 (9th Cir. 1992) (the primary consideration in Rule 16(b)'s good cause determination is the "diligence of the party seeking the amendment" to the court's schedule).
J. Clifford Wallace
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.