Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Margarita Rosales, et al v. El Rancho Farms

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 19, 2013

MARGARITA ROSALES, ET AL.,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
EL RANCHO FARMS, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jennifer L. Thurston United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER AMENDING THE SCHEDULING ORDER

On March 25, 2013, the Court issued an order certifying a class and appointing Plaintiffs Angelica Rosales and Margarita Rosales (also known as Lorena Corza) as class representatives. (Doc. 112). The parties filed a Joint Status Report on April 14, 2013, proposing an amended case schedule. (Doc. 114). Plaintiffs request additional discovery be permitted, while Defendant contends the discovery period has closed, and the deadlines for filing non-dispositive and dispositive pre-trial motions have passed. Id. at 2.

Notably, on March 24, 2011, the Court granted the parties' stipulated request to amend the Scheduling Order, and set deadlines for discovery, non-dispositive motions, and dispositive motions. (Doc. 24). The parties were cautioned: "The Court will not again modify case dates that have already passed. Moreover, no further amendments to the scheduling order will be granted absent a showing of exceptional good cause and only upon a showing that counsel has acted diligently." Id. at 7 (emphasis in original).

Plaintiffs offer no reason for re-opening the class discovery and merits discovery periods in 2 this action, though all discovery concluded in February 3, 2012. (Doc. 24 at 6). Because Plaintiffs 3 have not shown what discovery they believe needs to occur, they have not offered any explanation for 4 why this discovery was not conducted and completed within the time frame set by the Court and they 5 have not demonstrated they acted diligently to meet the discovery deadlines previously, the Court 6 declines to re-open discovery a year after its conclusion. 7

On the other hand, the Court notes the deadlines for filing non-dispositive and dispositive pre- 8 trial motions expired while the parties were awaiting rulings on Plaintiffs' motions for class 9 certification.

ORDER

Based upon the foregoing, the Court now amends the scheduling order as follows:

1. Non-dispositive motions SHALL be filed on or before April 29, 2013, and heard no later than May 28, 2013;

2. Dispositive motions SHALL be filed on or before June 10, 2013, and heard no later than July 22, 2013;

3. The pre-trial conference is SET for September 12, 2013, at 8:30 a.m. before Judge Ishii; and

4. The trial date is SET for November 19, 2013, at 8:30 a.m. before Judge Ishii.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130419

© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.