Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:19-cv-02612_de58> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:19-cv-02612_de58 RegisterActionDate "2020-04-30" @default.
- ilnd;;1:19-cv-02612_de58 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before the Honorable Young B. Kim: Parties' joint motion for reconsideration of the court's April 25, 2020 order, treated as a motion for extension of time, 57 is granted. When a mistake is made, it is good practice, both for litigants and for the courts, to admit the mistake and address it promptly. This court has done so when called for in the past, most recently on April 21, 2020, in Mendez v. City of Chicago, No. 18 CV 5560. Here, the motion shows that the parties failed to comply with discovery deadlines the court set on March 18, 2020. (R. 52.) However, instead of admitting their mistake, in the current motion they shift the blame to the court, asserting that it applied the wrong deadlines in its April 25, 2020 order. In moving the court for reconsideration, the parties point to the first and second general orders, dated March 17 and March 30, 2020, which, among other things, extended deadlines in civil cases by 21 and 28 days, respectively. (R. 57 at 2.) According to the parties, the court made a mistake on April 25, 2020, by failing to account for the 28-day extension under the second general order, which, they say, extended their time to file the joint status report required by the court's order dated March 18, 2020. But in the scheduling order this court entered on March 18, 2020, it made clear that "[u]nless this court amends this order, it will stand." (R. 52.) The parties ignore this language in the current motion, and also fail to address the language in the second amended general order making clear that the court may, "on a case-by-case basis and for good cause," shorten or extend the extensions granted by the general orders. (R. 54, 2d Am. Gen. Order 2(c).) Instead of acknowledging that they misinterpreted this court's scheduling order and seeking an extension of time, the parties' motion reflects an attempt to avoid responsibility for the missed deadlines. Having said that, the court understands how the interaction of the general orders and the court's minute order might have created confusion for the parties with respect to the deadlines this court set. For that reason, the court treats the current motion as a request for an extension of time. Parties are to comply with the following fourth amended schedule: (1) serve answers to written discovery requests by May 1, 2020; (2) confer about the adequacy of the discovery responses by May 15, 2020; and (3) file a joint status report identifying each side's written discovery issues, along with the relevant written discovery responses as exhibits by May 22, 2020. If the parties do not have any disputed written discovery issues, a status report is not required. The status hearing scheduled for August 3, 2020, is rescheduled for May 27, 2020, at 10:30 a.m. by phone to discuss the written discovery issues identified. This schedule is firm. To be abundantly clear, this schedule will stand regardless of the third amended general order or future general orders that may issue. The conference call number for the status hearing is (877) 336-1839 and the passcode is 4333213. Finally, the August 31, 2020 fact discovery deadline stands. Mailed notice (ma,) (Entered: 04/30/2020)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:19-cv-02612_de58 AdministrativeID "58" @default.
- ilnd;;1:19-cv-02612_de58 OntologyLabel minute_entry @default.
- ilnd;;1:19-cv-02612_de58 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:19-cv-02612_de57 @default.