Meza

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GRISELDA MEZA, No. 2:24-cv-01376-DAD-JDP 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. SCHEDULING ORDER 14 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY,

15 Defendant. 16

17 18 Pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court has reviewed the 19 parties’ joint status report (Doc. No. 13) and has determined that the court need not “consult[] 20 with the parties’ attorneys and any unrepresented parties at a scheduling conference,” before 21 issuing a scheduling order in this case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(1)(B). Accordingly, the court 22 vacates the initial scheduling conference set for February 10, 2025 and hereby issues this 23 scheduling order. 24 I. SERVICE OF PROCESS 25 The named defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has been served as required 26 by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5. No further service is permitted without leave of court, 27 good cause having been shown under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b). 28 ///// 1 II. JOINDER OF ADDITIONAL PARTIES /…