Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-02273/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-02273-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:0271 Patent Infringement

---

1 

18-cv-02273-BEN (JLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

NEWSPIN SPORTS, LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

BLAST MOTION, INC., et al., 

Defendants. 

 Case No.: 18-cv-02273-BEN (JLB) 

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND THE 

DEADLINE FOR FILING OF 

DISCOVERY MOTIONS 

[ECF No. 48] 

Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Extend the Deadline for Filing of 

Discovery Motions. (ECF No. 48.) On January 13, 2020, Defendants served their 

responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests for Production and Plaintiff’s First Set of 

Interrogatories. (See id. at 3.) On January 22, 2020, Plaintiff served its responses to 

Defendants’ First Set of Requests for Production and Defendants’ First Set of 

Interrogatories. (See id.) The parties presently seek an extension of time until 

March 20, 2020 to bring any discovery dispute before the Court with respect to these 

discovery responses. 

/// 

Case 3:18-cv-02273-BEN-JLB Document 52 Filed 02/25/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2 

18-cv-02273-BEN (JLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

I. BACKGROUND 

A. Defendants’ Responses to Plaintiff’s Discovery 

Pursuant to Judge Burkhardt’s Civil Chambers Rules, the parties were required to 

begin meeting and conferring regarding Defendants’ responses no later than 

January 27, 2020. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. § IV(A). The parties did not meet 

and confer until February 3, 2020. (See ECF No. 48 at 3.) Therefore, the parties’ meet and 

confer efforts were untimely with respect to Defendants’ responses. 

The parties were also required to bring any dispute concerning Defendants’ 

responses to the Court’s attention “no later than 30 calendar days after the date upon which 

the event giving rise to the dispute occurred.” See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. §§ IV(A), 

(B), (E). With respect to Defendants’ responses, the parties failed to bring any dispute to 

the Court’s attention before the applicable deadline of February 12, 2020. Rather, the 

parties waited and filed the present motion for an extension of time on February 13, 2020. 

If the parties needed additional time to bring the dispute to the Court’s attention, they were 

required to request an extension of time no less than 10 calendar days in advance of the 

deadline at issue. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. § IV(A). The parties did not do so. 

Therefore, the present joint motion for extension of time is untimely with respect to 

Defendants’ responses. 

 B. Plaintiff’s Responses to Defendants’ Discovery 

Pursuant to Judge Burkhardt’s Civil Chambers Rules, the parties were required to 

begin meeting and conferring regarding Plaintiff’s responses no later than 

February 5, 2020. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. § IV(A). The parties represent in 

their joint motion that they do not plan to meet and confer regarding Plaintiff’s responses 

until February 17, 2020. (See ECF No. 48 at 3.) Therefore, the parties’ meet and confer 

efforts were also untimely with respect to Plaintiff’s responses. 

With respect to Plaintiff’s responses, the parties were required to bring any dispute 

concerning the responses to the Court’s attention by February 21, 2020. See J. Burkhardt 

Civ. Chambers R. §§ IV(A), (B), (E). If the parties determined that they needed additional 

Case 3:18-cv-02273-BEN-JLB Document 52 Filed 02/25/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3 

18-cv-02273-BEN (JLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

time, as they have, they were required to file a joint motion to extend time no later than 

February 11, 2020. See J. Burkhardt Civ. Chambers R. §§ IV(A). The parties did not file 

the present motion until February 13, 2020. Therefore, the current request for an extension 

of time until March 20, 2020 is untimely. 

II. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION 

Despite the parties’ failure to follow this Court’s Civil Chambers Rules and to 

address excusable neglect for their untimeliness in the pending joint motion, the Court will 

consider the joint motion in the interests of justice. 

The parties represent that they plan to meet and confer regarding their outstanding 

discovery disputes on February 17, 2020. (ECF No. 48 at 3.) Following this date, the 

parties request nearly five additional weeks to bring any remaining disputes before the 

Court. (See id. at 3-4.) The parties assert that this additional time would provide the parties 

with “the opportunity to resolve any remaining disputes after each party provides its 

supplements and to resolve other aspects of document production or, if necessary, seek 

Court intervention.” (Id. at 4.) 

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the parties have established good cause 

for an extension, but not for an extension of the length requested. Accordingly, the joint 

motion is GRANTED IN PART. Any discovery disputes regarding Plaintiff’s responses 

and Defendants’ responses to the above-listed discovery must be brought to the attention 

of the Court in accordance with Judge Burkhardt’s Civil Chambers Rules no later than 

March 16, 2020. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 25, 2020 

Case 3:18-cv-02273-BEN-JLB Document 52 Filed 02/25/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3