Gonzalez et al v. United States of America et al
Filing
54
ORDER DENYING #52 Stipulation for Parties to Continue Trial Date; Pre-Trial Conference and Deadline to Complete Expert Discovery signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/2/2011. (Timken, A)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
MIGUEL GONZALEZ, JR., a minor by and
through his guardian ad litem, Maria
Gonzales, MARIA GONZALEZ, and
MIGUEL GONZALEZ,
13
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00509-LJO-SKO
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION
TO MODIFY THE SCHEDULING
ORDER
Plaintiffs,
14
v.
15
(Docket No. 52)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,
16
17
Defendants.
/
18
19
On June 1, 2011, the parties filed a request to modify the scheduling order to allow additional
20
time for the matter to be privately mediated. The first date available for mediation is August 29,
21
2011, which conflicts with the parties' current schedule. The parties, therefore, request that all the
22
remaining deadlines in the case be extended to allow time for the private mediation.
23
While the Court is willing to grant a modification of the schedule to allow for mediation, the
24
schedule proposed by the parties is not workable. Specifically, the parties request that the dispositive
25
motion filing deadline be continued to February 30, 2012, and the Pre-Trial conference be continued
26
to April 12, 2012. A February 30, 2012, deadline is impossible and motions must be filed at least
27
28 days prior to any hearing on that motion. Local Rule 230(b). Thus, a motion filed on February
28
29, 2012, will not be heard until March 28, 2011, leaving, at best, only 14 days between the
1
dispositive motion hearing date and the Pre-Trial Conference – which is an insufficient amount of
2
time.
3
The Court is reticent to select alternative dates for the Pre-Trial conference and the Trial
4
without any input from counsel and their clients regarding their availability on any of the dates
5
chosen. The Court, therefore, denies the modification to the schedule as proposed. The parties are
6
encouraged to renew their motion for a schedule modification that allows: (1) at least 6 weeks
7
between the dispositive motion filing deadline and the hearing date; (2) at least 6 weeks between any
8
dispositive motion hearing and the Pre-Trial Conference and (3) at least 6 weeks between the Pre-
9
Trial Conference and the Trial date.
10
11
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED THAT the parties' motion for a modification to the
schedule is DENIED without prejudice.
12
13
IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
Dated:
ie14hj
June 2, 2011
/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
