McConnell v. Estes Express Lines, Inc.

District Court, D. Nevada

McConnell v. Estes Express Lines, Inc.

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 7 JENIFRE MCCONNELL, Case No. 2:23-cv-01227-GMN-NJK 8 Plaintiff(s), Order ov. [Docket No. 18] 10) ESTES EXPRESS LINES, INC., 11 Defendant(s). 12 Pending before the Court is a stipulation to extend unexpired case management deadlines 13] by three months. Docket No. 18. Good cause appears to exist for an extension in light of the out- 14] of-state medical records and employment records that must be obtained. Docket No. 18 at 2. With 15] respect to the length of extension sought, however, the long three-month extension is premised on 16] a desire to mediate. Jd. (“The parties request a ninety (90) day discovery extension to 17} accommodate mediation”). Settlement discussions and alternative dispute resolution are common 18] aspects of federal litigation and do not generally constitute sufficient grounds to extend case 19] management deadlines. See Williams v. James River Grp. Inc.,

627 F. Supp. 3d 1172

, 1181 (D. 20] Nev. 2022). The stipulation does not explain why a different result should be reached in this case, 21] and the Court is particularly disinclined to grant a lengthy extension of the case management 22|| deadlines without knowing a firm date on which the mediation will proceed. See

id.

at 1181 n.8 23} (identifying factors). Accordingly, the stipulation is DENIED without prejudice. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 Dated: November 20, 2023 UA. 26 fo x Nancy J. Koppe 27 United States Magistrate Judge 28

Reference

Status
Unknown