UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

NATIONWIDE AFFINITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY and DIANE COLLIER,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No.: 6:22-cv-578-WWB-EJK

OHIO SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant. / ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 25) and Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Its Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 29). As an initial matter, Plaintiffs’ Motion, which was filed after the amended pleading was filed, still inexplicably fails to comply with this Court’s Standing Order and, therefore, it will be denied. Pursuant to the Case Management and Scheduling Order (Doc. 13), all dispositive motions, including motions for summary judgment, were due on or before December 5, 2023. (Id. at 2). Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment was not timely filed and leave of Court was neither properly sought nor granted. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment will be stricken. Also before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for an Extension of Time to File Its Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 27). If a motion for extension is filed before the scheduling order deadline expires, the court may grant it for good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A), 16(b)(4). However, where, as here, the motion is filed after the deadline for compliance, the party seeking an extension must satisfy the excusable neglect standard. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(B). When requesting an extension, the parties should show they have worked diligently to meet the deadline and yet still cannot meet it.

Sosa v. Airprint Sys., Inc.,

, 1418 (11th Cir. 1998). Defendant’s Motion does not set forth good cause for modifying the scheduling order or explain why, despite proper diligence, Defendant could not have timely filed a compliant motion. The Court notes that it explicitly warned to the parties to familiarize themselves with this Court’s Local Rules and Orders at the outset of this litigation. (Doc. 6). Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion will also be denied. Therefore, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Its Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 29) is DENIED. 2. Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 25) is STRICKEN.

3. Defendant’s Motion for an Extension of Time to File Its Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 27) is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on December 8, 2023.

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record