Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Securities and Exchange Commission v. RMR Asset Management Co.

United States District Court, S.D. California

September 9, 2019

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
v.
RMR ASSET MANAGEMENT COMPANY, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART JOINT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY DATES [ECF NO. 105]

          Linda Lopez, Judge

         On August 28, 2019, Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Defendant Jocelyn Murphy, Defendant Michael Murphy, and Defendant Richard Gounaud filed a joint motion to extend several discovery-related deadlines by approximately two-and-a-half to three months. ECF No. 105. In support, the parties state that (1) Plaintiff's lead counsel resigned his position at the SEC on August 9, 2019 and new SEC counsel joined the case on August 2, 2019; (2) despite diligently conducting discovery, additional discovery still remains, including the depositions of Defendants; (3) Defendant Gounaud's answer to the complaint is still outstanding; and (4) Defendant Gounaud's motion to change venue is currently pending. Id. at 2-3. / / / Once a Rule 16 scheduling order is issued, dates set forth therein may be modified only “for good cause and with the judge's consent.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(4); see also ECF No. 76 at 6 (stating that dates and times “will not be modified except for good cause shown”). The Rule 16 good cause standard focuses on the “reasonable diligence” of the moving party. Noyes v. Kelly Servs., 488 F.3d 1163, 1174 n.6 (9th Cir. 2007); Coleman v. Quaker Oats Co., 232 F.3d 1271, 1294-95 (9th Cir. 2000) (stating Rule 16(b) scheduling order may be modified for “good cause” based primarily on diligence of moving party). Essentially, “the focus of the inquiry is upon the moving party's reasons for seeking modification.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992).

         The Court has reviewed the joint motion and finds good cause to extend the deadlines, but not for the length of time requested. The parties have been aware of the Scheduling Order establishing the discovery-related deadlines since April 1, 2019. See ECF No. 76. The parties have not adequately explained why they have not yet completed the depositions of any of the three remaining Defendants, despite about five months of discovery. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART the joint motion and resets the deadlines as follows:[1]

Event

Current Date

New Date

Fact-Discovery Deadline

September 27, 2019

November 27, 2019

Expert Designations

October 28, 2019

December 17, 2019

Rebuttal Expert Designations

November 12, 2019

January 10, 2020

Expert Disclosures

December 12, 2019

February 10, 2020

Contradictory/Rebuttal Disclosures

January 10, 2020

February 24, 2020

Expert Discovery Deadline

February 10, 2020

March 24, 2020

Pretrial Motion Deadline

March 10, 2010

April 24, 2020

Confidential Settlement Statements

May19, 2020

June 30, 2020

Mandatory Settlement Conference

May 27, 2020 at 9:30 a.m.

July 8, 2020 at 9:30 a.m.

FRCP 26(a)(3) Pretrial Disclosures

June 11, 2020

July 23, 2020

Civil LR 16.1.f.4 Meeting

June 18, 2020

July 30, 2020

Objections to Pretrial Disclosures

June 25, 2020

August 6, 2020

Proposed Final Pretrial Conference Order

July 2, 2020

August 13, 2020

Final Pretrial Conference

July 9, 2020 at 2:00 p.m.

August 20, 2020 at 2:00 p.m.

         All other requirements remain as previously set. See ECF No. 76.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.

---------

Notes:

[1] Because the amended expert discovery deadline is March 24, 2020, the Court finds it necessary to extend the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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