Continental Casualty Company v. Phillips Cattle Co., Inc.

United States District Court for the Southern District of California

Continental Casualty Company v. Phillips Cattle Co., Inc.

Trial Court Opinion

.

2 . 3 5 || 6 □

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 || CONTINENTAL CASUALTY Case No.: 3:21-cv-01244-GPC-RBM D COMPANY, Plaintiff | ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 13 || "| DENYING IN PART STIPULATION 14 || AND JOINT MOTION TO || PHILLIPS CATTLE CO., INC, etal. TRAL EVALUATION 16 □ Defendants:| CONFERENCE 17 [Doc. 35] 18 19 20 On February 16, 2022, the undersigned issued a notice and order for early neutral 21 evaluation conference (“ENE”) to take place on March 23, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. with a case 22 ||management conference (“CMC”) to follow if no settlement is reached. (Doc. 33.) 23 ~ On March 3, 2022, Plaintiff Continental Casualty Co. and Defendants Genox 24 || Transportation, Inc., Cleancor LNG, LLC, and Phillips Cattle Co., Inc. (collectively, the 25 ||‘‘Parties”) filed a stipulation and joint motion to vacate or continue the ENE pursuant to 26 Civil Local Rule 16(c)(1) (“Joint Motion”). (Doc. 35.) In the Joint Motion, the Parties 27 || state that “all necessary parties to this matter have not been served and all parties have not 28 || yet made an appearance in this action; and early resolution is unlikely unless and until, this ]

1 matter is fully at issue.” (Cd. at 1-2.) Further, the parties have met and conferred and 2 ||“believe that the ENE is premature since they will not be able to have meaningful 3 ||settlement negotiations without the participation of all necessary parties.” (/d. at 3.) 4 A scheduling order may be modified only upon a showing of good cause and with 5 || the judge’s consent. FED. R. CIv. P. 16(b)(4); see, e.g., Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 6 || Inc.,

975 F.2d 604, 609

(9th Cir. 1992) (stating, “the focus of [the good cause] inquiry is 7 upon the moving party’s reasons for seeking modification”). 8 Here, the undersigned finds good cause to vacate the ENE, and thus the Joint Motion 9 is GRANTED IN PART. The Joint Motion is DENIED IN PART because the CMC will 10 || proceed as scheduled on March 23, 2022 at 1:30 p.m., wherein the Court will reschedule 11 ||the ENE after conferring with the Parties. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 DATE: March 7, 2022 . 14 15 : <epptibe mace Hoaapre □□ 16 HON. RUTH BERMUDEZ MONTENEGRO UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19

20 21 | 22 23 24 . 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown