Morts v. Microsoft Corporation

3 THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 AT SEATTLE JENNIFER MORTS, No. 2:20-cv-01500-JCC 11 Plaintiff, STIPULATED MOTION AND 12 v. [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING THE TRIAL DATE AND RELATED MICROSOFT CORPORATION, DEADLINES 14 Defendant.

STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THE BLANKENSHIP LAW FIRM, PLLC 1 I. STIPULATION AND RELIEF REQUESTED 2 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b), Plaintiff Jennifer Morts and Defendant Microsoft Corporation (collectively, “the Parties”), respectfully request that the Court modify the current case schedule to extend the trial date from February 14, 2022 to June 13, 2022, with all other pending deadlines extended to conform with the new trial date.

This is the first and only continuance that has been requested in this case. The parties have exchanged written discovery and have attempted to work cooperatively to move this case forward as much as possible. However, the parties still have a considerable amount of discovery left to conduct, including depositions of the Plaintiff and other critical witnesses. In addition, the Parties would like to engage in mediation before discovery is completed to see if there is a possibility of resolving the case while still preserving sufficient time to finish discovery. The Parties believe a mid-discovery mediation, and being provided with additional time in which to conduct this mediation, may increase the chances of obtaining a negotiated settlement, thereby relieving the Court of the necessity of conducting a jury trial in this matter.

17 The Parties, through their counsel, have met and conferred and here jointly represent that adjustment of the current trial date is necessary to avoid prejudice to the Parties and to facilitate a possible negotiated resolution of this dispute.

21 II. STATEMENT OF FACTS 22 Plaintiff filed her Complaint for Damages on September 21, 2020. The current trial date is February 14, 2022. The current discovery cutoff is October 18, 2021. Dkt. 14.

24 The Parties seek a continuance, so that they can engage in targeted discovery and then attempt to resolve the case through mediation prior to expending substantial additional time and resources completing all remaining discovery.

STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THE BLANKENSHIP LAW FIRM, PLLC 1 The Parties have been working diligently and efficiently to exchange written discovery and confer on deficiencies, attempting to find ways to resolve discovery disputes informally, rather than involve the Court. However, the Parties still have a considerable amount of discovery left to conduct, including depositions, and are still working to resolve outstanding discovery disputes.

6 The Parties would like to have time to explore mediation prior to finishing discovery, which is not possible with the current October 18, 2021 discovery cutoff. A continuance of the trial date and other deadlines would allow the Parties to complete some key depositions, explore mediation, and have sufficient time to complete discovery if mediation is unsuccessful.

11 In short, additional time will facilitate engaging in meaningful mediation after the Parties complete key depositions but before the Parties invest substantial time, fees and costs completing discovery prior to dispositive motion practice.

14 III. AUTHORITY 15 This Motion is based upon the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, corresponding case law, and the Court’s power to control its calendar. Orders entered before the final pretrial conference may be modified upon a showing of “good cause.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992) (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)).

19 Here, “good cause” exists. The Parties jointly seek the Court’s relief in order to have the opportunity to attempt informal resolution of this case prior to investing substantial additional fees and costs necessary to complete discovery and dispositive motion practice.

22 Despite their diligence, with the soon-approaching discovery cutoff in October, the Parties will not be able to complete all discovery and also explore mediation. Jackson v. Laureate, Inc., 186 F.R.D. 605, 607 (E.D. Cal. 1999) (citing Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609) (good cause for continuance exists where, despite parties’ diligence, they will not be able to meet the scheduling deadlines).

STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THE BLANKENSHIP LAW FIRM, PLLC 1 IV. CONCLUSION 2 For the above-stated reasons, the Parties respectfully request that the Court grant this stipulated motion and issue a revised case scheduling order moving all currently pending deadlines related to the new trial date. The Parties request a new trial date of June 13, 2022.

6 IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

8 DATED this 10th day of August, 2021.

Attorneys for Plaintiff: Attorneys for Defendant:

12 By: /s Scott C.G. Blankenship By: /s Laurence A. Shapero Scott C. G. Blankenship, WSBA No. 21431 Laurence A. Shapero, WSBA No. 31301 Richard E. Goldsworthy, WSBA No. 40684 Sarah Jung Evans, WSBA No. 37409 The Blankenship Law Firm, PLLC Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 3250 P.C Seattle, WA 98104 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 5150 Telephone: (206) 343-2700 Seattle, WA 98101 Facsimile: (206) 343-2704 Telephone: 206-693-7057 [email protected] Facsimile: 206-693-7058 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 19 PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’ STIPULATED MOTION, IT IS SO ORDERED 20 DATED this 12th day of August 2021.

A

John C. Coughenour UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

STIPULATED MOTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THE BLANKENSHIP LAW FIRM, PLLC