Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-02438/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-02438-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441ac Removal- Account Receivable

---

1

3:19-cv-02438-JLS-AHG

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

JOHANNA VISCARRA,

Plaintiff,

v.

SUNROAD BCV AUTO, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 3:19-cv-02438-JLS-AHG

ORDER GRANTING JOINT 

MOTION TO CONTINUE EARLY 

NEUTRAL EVALUATION 

CONFERENCE AND CASE 

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

[ECF No. 11]

This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Continue Early 

Neutral Evaluation and Case Management Conference and Related Dates. ECF No. 11. 

Parties seeking to continue an ENE must demonstrate good cause. ECF No. 8 at 4 (“An 

ENE may be rescheduled only upon a showing of good cause”); Chmb.R. at 2 (stating that 

any request for continuance requires “[a] showing of good cause for the request”); see also 

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 

Case 3:19-cv-02438-JLS-AHG Document 13 Filed 02/19/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

3:19-cv-02438-JLS-AHG

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

Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992).

The Court has reviewed the Joint Motion and finds that the parties have readily met 

the good cause standard here. Due to family medical emergencies beyond their control, 

counsel for Defendant BMW of El Cajon and Hartford will be unable to attend the ENE as 

scheduled on February 26, 2020. ECF No. 11 at 2. Additionally, the parties have all agreed 

to the requested continuance and have otherwise complied with Judge Goddard’s 

requirements for seeking a continuance. See ECF No. 8 at 3-4.

However, the parties’ requested date for resetting the ENE is unavailable on the 

Court’s calendar. After conferring with counsel via email to ascertain their and the parties’ 

availability on alternative dates, the Court hereby GRANTS the Motion to Continue (ECF 

No. 11), VACATES the February 26, 2020 ENE, and RESETS it for May 4, 2020 at 

2:00 PM in the chambers of Magistrate Judge Allison H. Goddard, located on the third 

floor of the Edward J. Schwartz U.S. Courthouse, 221 West Broadway, Suite 3142, San 

Diego, California 92101. Do not report to Courtroom 3B; report to Chambers. Counsel 

for any non-English speaking party is responsible for arranging for the appearance of an 

interpreter at the conference.

The Court RESETS the related deadlines as follows:

1. Confidential ENE Statements Required: No later than April 29, 2020, the parties 

shall submit confidential statements of five (5) pages or less directly to the chambers 

of Magistrate Judge Goddard outlining the nature of the case, the claims, and the 

defenses. These statements shall not be filed or served on opposing counsel. 

They shall be lodged via email at efile_goddard@casd.uscourts.gov. The ENE 

statement is limited to five (5) pages or less, and up to five (5) pages of exhibits 

or declarations. Each party’s ENE statement must outline:

A. the nature of the case and the claims, 

B. position on liability or defense, 

Case 3:19-cv-02438-JLS-AHG Document 13 Filed 02/19/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

3:19-cv-02438-JLS-AHG

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

C. position regarding settlement of the case with a specific1

demand/offer for settlement,

2 and 

D. any previous settlement negotiations or mediation efforts.

2. Case Management Conference: In the event the case does not settle at the ENE, 

the Court will immediately thereafter hold a Case Management Conference 

(“CMC”) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P 16(b). The Court maintains the existing deadline 

of February 19, 2020 to complete initial disclosures. Additionally, the parties have 

already met their deadline of filing a Joint Case Management Statement by February 

18, 2020. ECF No. 12. If the parties wish to submit an updated Joint Case 

Management Statement prior to the rescheduled CMC, they must do so no later than 

April 27, 2020.

The parties must abide by all other mandatory procedures set forth in the Court’s 

previous Order setting the ENE and CMC. ECF No. 8.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 19, 2020

 

1 A general statement, such as that a party “will negotiate in good faith,” is a not a 

specific demand or offer.

2 If a specific demand or offer cannot be made at the time the ENE statement is 

submitted, then the reasons as to why a demand or offer cannot be made must be stated. 

Further, the party must explain when they will be in a position to state a demand or offer. 

Case 3:19-cv-02438-JLS-AHG Document 13 Filed 02/19/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3