Vuz

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Ashley R. VUZ, Case No.: 20-cv-0246-GPC-AGS Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO AMEND THE

v.

SCHEDULING ORDER (ECF 133)

DCSS III, Inc. (d/b/a Gossip Grill), et al., Defendants. 8 Plaintiff Vuz applies to “[modify] the scheduling order to continue . . . discovery deadlines” by 28 days. (See ECF 133.) A scheduling order “may be modified only for good cause.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “Rule 16(b)’s ‘good cause’ standard primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). Good cause may be found when the moving party shows that it is “unable to comply with the scheduling order’s deadlines due to matters not reasonably foreseeable at the time the scheduling order issued, and that it was diligent in seeking a modification once it became apparent it could not comply with the scheduling order.” Sharp v. Covenant Care LLC, 288 F.R.D. 465, 467 (S.D. Cal.…