United States District Court, D. Nevada
JACKSON LEWIS P.C. Phillip C. Thompson David Montgomery, Ohio
Bar # 40276 Phillip C. Thompson, Bar # 12114 Attorneys for
Michael J. Morrison Attorney for Plaintiff Marco De La Cuesta
MOTION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF
Apttus Corporation ("Apttus"), by and through its
undersigned counsel, hereby moves to extend discovery in this
matter for the limited purpose of taking Plaintiffs
deposition. This Motion is based on the following Memorandum
of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Counsel
attached hereto, all pleadings and documents on file with the
Court, and any argument that the Court deems proper.
OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
March 15, 2018, the parties had agreed to a deposition
schedule for the depositions of multiple witnesses, including
Plaintiff. See Exhibit 1, Declaration of Phillip C.
Thompson, ¶ 2. The depositions were set to take place
during the week of March 19, 2018. Id. at ¶ 3.
Unfortunately, on March 15, 2018, Plaintiffs counsel was
forced to cancel the scheduled depositions due to health
concerns. Id. at ¶ 4.
that, the parties agreed to extend discovery for 120 days so
that Plaintiffs counsel could address his health concerns and
the parties could attempt to resolve the claims. ECF No. 66.
The parties then scheduled mediation and attempted to resolve
the claims without expending resources toward discovery. ECF
Nos. 67, 68, 69, and 70.
parties were ultimately unable to reach a resolution during
mediation. On February 19, 2019, the Court entered a minute
order setting the close of discovery for April 11, 2019. ECF
No. 74. The parties again worked to schedule multiple
depositions. The parties set six depositions to take pace
between March 25 and April 2, including Plaintiffs
deposition. Exhibit 1 at ¶ 5.
after the parties had agreed to the deposition schedule,
Plaintiffs counsel once again had to cancel all depositions
in order to undergo medical treatment. la. at ¶ 6. At
this time, Defendant understands that Plaintiffs counsel is
unable to appear for Plaint ff s deposition. Id. at
¶ 7. Accordingly, Defendant respectfully requests that
the discovery deadline be extended for the limited purpose of
permitting Defendant to conduct Plaintiffs deposition when
Plaintiffs counsel is able to appear.
to Fed.R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4), a case schedule may be modified
for good cause with the judge's consent. Fed.R.Civ.P.
16(b). In Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975
F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir.1992), the court explained, ...
Rule 16(b)'s "good cause" standard primarily
concerns 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." Fed. R.Civ.P. 16 advisory
committee's notes (1983 amendment) ... [T]he focus of the
inquiry is upon the moving party's reasons for seeking
modification.... If that party was not diligent, the inquiry
part, the "good cause" standard requires the
parties to demonstrate that "noncompliance with a Rule
16 deadline occurred or will occur, notwithstanding her
diligent efforts to comply Jackson, 186 F.R.D. at
at two different times, the parties reached agreement for
deposition dates and Defendant properly scheduled Plaintiffs
deposition prior to the close of discovery. Both times, the
depositions had to be cancelled due to health emergencies of
Plaintiffs counsel Defendant's noncompliance with the
discovery deadline will occur notwithstanding its diligent
efforts to comply.
Defendant respectfully requests that the discovery deadline
be extended for the limited purpose of permitting Defendant
to conduct Plaintiffs deposition as soon as Plaintiffs
counsel is available to appear for the deposition.