Goldstein
Goldstein v. General Motors LLC
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 MATT GOLDSTEIN, et al., individually, Case No.: 3:19-cv-01778-RSH-AHG and on behalf of a class of similarly ORDER GRANTING JOINT situated individuals,
MOTION TO AMEND
12 Plaintiff, SCHEDULING ORDER 13 v. [ECF No. 100]
GENERAL MOTORS LLC,
15 Defendant. 16 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Amend Scheduling Order. ECF No. 100. The parties jointly request that the Court extend the two remaining deadlines set forth in the May 4, 2022 Scheduling Order (ECF No. 94) by six months each. Under Fed. R. Civ. P 16(b)(4), “[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” “Good cause” is a non-rigorous standard that has been construed broadly across procedural and statutory contexts. Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th Cir. 2010). The good cause standard focuses on the diligence of the party seeking to amend the scheduling order and the reasons for seeking modification. Johnson v. Mammoth…