Adan
Adan v. City of San Diego
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RASHID ADAN, Case No.: 3:19-cv-1523-LAB-AHG
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING IN PART
v. JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE
DISCOVERY DEADLINES
CITY OF SAN DIEGO; OFFICER
JASON LANGLEY; and DOES 1–10, [ECF No. 16] Defendants. 16 17 18 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Continue Discovery Deadlines. ECF 19 No. 16. There, the parties jointly requested that the Court extend discovery deadlines by 20 approximately three months. Id. 21 Parties seeking to modify the scheduling order under Rule 16(b) must demonstrate 22 23 good cause. FED. R. CIV. P. 16(b)(4) (“A schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent”); Chmb.R. at 2 (stating that any request for continuance 24 25 requires “[a] showing of good cause for the request”); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 6(b) (“When an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend 26 the time”). “Good cause” is a non-rigorous standard…