Hastings

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 DAVID HASTINGS, Case No.: 19cv2217-BAS-MDD

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART EX

v. PARTE MOTION TO AMEND THE

SCHEDULING ORDER

FORD MOTOR COMPANY and

FORD OF CHULA VISTA,

14 [ECF No. 60] Defendants.

16 On March 12, 2021, Plaintiff moved, ex parte, to continue all deadlines in the Court’s Scheduling Order by 90 days. (ECF No. 60-1). Defendants filed a declaration of counsel in which they do “not object to the 30(b)(6) deposition, Plaintiff’s deposition . . . , or the vehicle inspection” being continued to a date after April 1, 2021. (ECF No. 68 at 5). District courts have broad discretion to supervise the pre-trial phase of litigation and to “manage the discovery process to facilitate prompt and efficient resolution of the lawsuit.” Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 599 (1988). Scheduling orders are issued pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) to limit the time to join parties, amend the pleadings, 1…