1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SCRIPPS HIGHLAND M/I Case No.: 23-cv-1571-WQH-DDL DEVELOPMENT, L.P., a California 12 limited partnership, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 MOTION TO CONTINUE FACT Plaintiff, DISCOVERY DEADLINE 14 v. 15

[Dkt. No. 63] 16 TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, L.P., a

Delaware limited partnership; and DOES 17 1 through 50, inclusive, 18 Defendants. 19 20 21

22 The Scheduling Order in this case requires that “[a]ll fact discovery shall be 23 completed by all parties by December 19, 2024.” Dkt. No. 52 at 2. On that same date, the 24 parties jointly moved to continue that deadline until February 28, 2025. Dkt. No. 63 at 2. 25 The parties represent they “have considered and discussed the current Scheduling Order’s 26 deadline” and “[d]ue to parties’ and their respective witnesses’ schedules, the parties do 27 not believe they will be able to conclude written discovery and fact witness depositions by 28 December 20 [sic], 2024.” Id. l “A schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” 2 ||Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “Rule 16(b)’s good cause standard primarily considers the 3 || diligence of the party seeking the amendment.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 4 ||

(9th Cir. 1992).' “The district court may modify the pretrial schedule if 5 cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Jd. 6 || “If that party was not diligent, the inquiry should end.” Jd. 7 The joint motion is silent as to the parties’ apparent inability to timely complete fact 8 || discovery by the December 19 deadline. As such, there is no showing of diligence by the 9 || parties. Moreover, the undersigned’s Chambers Rule § III.E provides that motions to 10 |}extend, amend, continue, or vacate deadlines that are “filed on the date of the deadline 11 sought to be modified will be denied unless it is apparent on the face of the motion that the 12 ||request could not have been made earlier for reasons not within counsel’s control.” The 13 motion, filed on the December 19 deadline, ignores this rule. 14 The parties’ failure to establish diligence and comply with the Chambers Rules 15 || ordinarily would compel denial of their motion. However, given that the parties seek only 16 |/to continue the fact discovery deadline and wish to engage in simultaneous fact and expert 17 || discovery, the Court will grant the requested extension with the express admonition that all 18 || other deadlines set forth in the Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 52) remain unchanged. 19 For the foregoing reasons, the parties’ joint motion is GRANTED. The fact 20 || discovery cutoff is extended to February 28, 2025. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 ||Dated: December 20, 2024 Chil habe 24 Hon.DavidD.Leshner 95 United States Magistrate Judge 26 27 28 ! All citations, internal quotation marks, and subsequent history are omitted, and emphasis is added, unless otherwise noted.