Nozot v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID NOZOT, Case No.: 24cv1171-DMS(LR) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT v. MOTION TO CONTINUE [ECF NO. 19] WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., et al., 15 Defendants.

18 On January 24, 2025, the parties filed a “Joint Moton to Continue the Dates Set in the Court’s Scheduling Order.” (ECF No. 19.) The parties seek to continue the deadline to complete fact discovery by approximately twenty-one days from January 24, 2025, until February 14, 2025. (ECF No. 19-1 at 2–4.) In support, the parties state that they require additional time to complete previously-noticed witness depositions. (Id. at 3.)

23 A scheduling order “may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). This good cause standard “primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment. The district court may modify the pretrial schedule if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) || Gnternal quotation marks and citation omitted). “If that party was not diligent, the inquiry should end.” Id. 3 Having considered the parties’ joint motion and supporting declarations, the Court ||finds good cause, GRANTS the motion, and approves the parties’ stipulation.

5 || Accordingly, the remaining depositions must be completed by February 14, 2025. All || other deadlines and requirements from the scheduling order remain unchanged. (See || ECF No. 12.)

8 IT IS SO ORDERED.

9 Dated: January 24, 2025 10 LY 11 Honorable Lupe Rodriguez, Jr. 1 United States Magistrate Judge