Yassein
Yassein v. Henderson
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 YOUNES YASSEIN, Case No.: 21-CV-892-LL(WVG)
Plaintiff,
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
v. AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER HENDERSON et al., Defendants. 17 18 On April 29, 2022, Defendants Henderson, Walton, and Fernandez (“Defendants”) filed a Motion to Amend Scheduling Order (“Motion”) seeking the Court’s approval to continue the April 29, 2022 deadline for fact discovery by sixty days. (Doc. No. 45.) For the reasons set forth below, the Joint Motion is DENIED without prejudice. In determining whether to modify a scheduling order the Court considers the “good cause” standard set out by Rule 16(b)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 16(b)(4)”). Rule 16(b)(4) provides a schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent. Rule 16(b)(4)’s “good cause” standard primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment. The district court may modify the pretrial 28…