Matches in SCALES for { <scales/DocketEntry/ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de303> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 6 of
6
with 100 items per page.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de303 RegisterActionDate "2020-04-06" @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de303 RegisterActionDescriptionText "TEXT ORDER granting in part and denying in part 235 Joint Motion to Extend Deadlines. Via Text Order dated 01/28/2019, the Court (per the issuing Magistrate Judge) adopted in relevant part the parties' 151 Amended Joint Rule 26(f) Report, which established a discovery deadline of 04/30/2020 and a dispositive motions deadline of 05/30/2020. In 235 Joint Motion (filed on 04/03/2020), the parties now seek to extend those deadlines to 07/29/2020 and 08/28/2020, respectively, because (due to COVID-19) their efforts to "work[] through discovery requests [] are expected to take longer... because of more limited access to materials and personnel, [which] in turn is expected to delay certain depositions that the parties expect to conduct before the close of discovery." Elsewhere in 235 Joint Report, the parties identify one set of discovery requests as to which they seek an extension of response time, i.e., a set of Requests for Production served on Defendants 9AA4F67, P.C., Riddle & Brantley, LLP, Van Laningham & Associates, PLLC, and Wallace 2F675A7 Law, PLLC, currently due on 04/15/2020. The Docket also reflects that various Defendants (including those named above) previously received two extensions of time (via Text Orders dated 03/02/20 and 03/25/20) to respond to Plaintiffs' Third Set of Discovery, with responses now due by 04/23/2020, based on showings totally unrelated to COVID-19. Accordingly, prior to any issues arising from COVID-19, the parties knew that only 15 days and seven days, respectively, would remain to complete depositions within the lengthy discovery period, after the due dates for the above-discussed written discovery. Nowhere in 235 Joint Motion, do the parties identify the specific depositions that they had made concrete plans to conduct during that small window of time. In the absence of some showing that the parties actually had made proper preparations to complete additional deposition discovery within the existing discovery deadline, which they now reasonably cannot complete as planned due to COVID-19, the Court declines to enter a blanket extension of the discovery and dispositive motions deadlines. The Court, however, will extend to 05/15/2020 the deadline for Defendants 9AA4F67, P.C., Riddle & Brantley, LLP, Van Laningham & Associates, PLLC, and Wallace 2F675A7 Law, PLLC to respond to Requests for Production currently due on 04/15/2020. The Court also notes that 235 Joint Motion requests an extension of the mediation deadline to 07/29/2020. Again, 235 Joint Motion does not set out any information about what reasonable plans the parties had made to conduct mediation by the close of the existing discovery deadline. Nonetheless, the Court has an independent interest in seeing that the parties conduct a meaningful mediation and the current public health situation undoubtedly makes that more difficult at present. Accordingly, the Court extends the mediation deadline to 07/29/2020. Issued by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 04/06/2020. (AULD, L.) (Entered: 04/06/2020)" @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de303 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de303 hasJudgeReference SJ004076 @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de303 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de177 @default.
- ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de303 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ncmd;;1:16-cv-00542_de300 @default.