Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00504/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00504-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 340
Nature of Suit: Marine Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ellen Spiller and John Spiller, wife and

husband,

Plaintiffs

v.

ARAMARK LEISURE SERVICES

GROUP INC., an Arizona corporation;

ARAMARK SPORTS &

ENTERTAINMENT SERVICES, an

Arizona corporation; LAKE POWELL

RESORTS & MARINA, an Arizona

corporation; JOHN DOE I, an employee of

Defendants, and JANE DOE I, husband and

wife; JOHN DOE II, an employee of

Defendants, and JANE DOE II, husband

and

wife; JOHN DOES III-X; JANE DOES IIIX; BLACK CORPORATIONS I-X; WHITE

PARTNERSHIPS I-X; AND GREEN

LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES I-X,

Defendants. _________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-504-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Pending before the Court is the parties' Stipulated Motion for an Extension of Time to

Comply with the Deadlines Established in the Order of the Court entered October 11, 2006.

(Doc. 29). This Court reserves the authority to extend discovery deadlines, especially blanket

requests such as the six month request currently before the Court, for circumstances proving

necessary and not creating undue delay. Here, the parties have failed to set forth any reason for

Case 2:06-cv-00504-SMM Document 31 Filed 05/29/07 Page 1 of 2
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

- 2 -

such a broad request. Further, in submitting proposed orders for the Court's review, counsel

must provide dates certain for each individual proposed deadline.

Accordingly

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED DENYING without prejudice the parties' Stipulated

Motion for an Extension of Time to Comply with the Deadlines Established in the Order of the

Court entered October 11, 2006. (Doc. 29).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties may file a second request for an extension

wherein they provide the Court with reasonable justification for such a delay. 

DATED this 25th day of May, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-00504-SMM Document 31 Filed 05/29/07 Page 2 of 2