Haley

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 LAWRENCE HALEY, Case No. 18-cv-07542-HSG

8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S EX

PARTE APPLICATION TO MODIFY

9 v. SCHEDULING ORDER

10 CLARK CONSTRUCTION GROUP- Re: Dkt. No. 46

CALIFORNIA, INC.,

11 Defendant. 12 13 Plaintiff Lawrence Haley moved ex parte to modify the scheduling order to extend the fact 14 discovery deadline from August 19, 2019 to October 2, 2019. Dkt. No. 46 (“Mot.”). The Court 15 held a hearing on the ex parte application on August 22, 2019. Having carefully considered the 16 parties’ arguments, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s ex parte application, and explains its reasoning 17 briefly for the record. 18 I. LEGAL STANDARD 19 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for 20 good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16. “Rule 16(b)’s ‘good cause’ 21 standard primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment.” Johnson v. 22 Mammoth Recreations,…