Roush
Roush v. San Joaquin Valley College, Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JENNIFER ROUSH, Case No. 1:21-cv-00556-JLT-BAM
12 Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING HEARING
13 v. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF
JENNIFER ROUSH’S MOTION TO
14 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY COLLEGE, KEN AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER TO GUERRERO and DOES 1 through 30, EXTEND TIME FOR NON-EXPERT 15 inclusive, DISCOVERY
16 Defendants. (Doc. 20) 17
18
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff Jennifer Roush’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion to Amend 19 20 Scheduling Order to Extend Time for Non-Expert Discovery. (Doc. 20.) Defendants San 21 Joaquin Valley College, Inc. dba San Joaquin Valley College, and Ken Guerrero 22 (“Defendants”) filed an opposition to the motion. (Doc. 24.) No reply was filed within ten 23 days of Defendants’ opposition and the deadline to reply has passed. L.R. 230(d). The Court 24 finds the motion suitable for decision without the need for oral argument. Accordingly, the 25 hearing on the motion currently set for November 18, 2022, is HEREBY…