Merrit

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 IAN MERRIT, Case No.: 23-cv-1031-CAB-KSC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

v. AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER [Doc. Nos. 27, 28] JONATHAN COGLEY, Defendant. 16 The parties’ Joint Motion Regarding Proposed Amendments to the Scheduling Order is presently before the Court. Doc. Nos. 27, 28. Although plaintiff frames part of his request for a relief as a 60-day continuance of the fact discovery cutoff, fact discovery in this case closed on April 26, 2024, and the parties are well into expert discovery. Compare Doc. No. 18 at 2-3 with Doc. No. 27 at 11. Accordingly, plaintiff seeks to reopen discovery as a matter of substance. Regardless of plaintiff’s framing of the issue, defendant opposes any amendment to the Scheduling Order. See Doc. No. 27 at 27. Plaintiff also seeks leave to file a first amended complaint, which defendant opposes. See Doc. No. 27 at 14-17, 22-27. (A) Whether to Reopen…