Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02344/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02344-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Account Receivable

---

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 This court does not have authority to revise the district court’s scheduling orders.

1

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2344 LKK JFM

vs.

MICHAEL DAUGHERTY,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

AND THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS.

 /

On February 9, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion to compel discovery. By agreement

of the parties, the motion was continued from March 2, 2006 to March 30, 2006 at 11:00 a.m.,

and the court approved the agreement by order filed February 27, 2006. The parties were to

continue their efforts to resolve the discovery disputes.

However, pursuant to the district court’s December 5, 2005 order, the discovery

motion cut off was extended to March 9, 2006. The district court’s prior scheduling order, filed 1

May 12, 2005, admonished the parties that the discovery deadline meant that discovery was to be

Case 2:04-cv-02344-LKK -JFM Document 90 Filed 03/27/06 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

2

conducted so as to be completed by the discovery deadline. (Id. at 4, emphasis in original.) The

district court further clarified that “the word ‘completed’ means that all discovery shall have been

conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to discovery shall

have been resolved by appropriate order if necesssary and, where discovery has been ordered, the

order has been complied with.” (Id. at 4.) 

Accordingly, the March 30, 2006 hearing is outside the scheduling order and will

be vacated from the court’s calendar. Plaintiff’s motion will be denied as untimely.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The March 30, 2006 hearing is vacated; and

2. Plaintiff’s February 9, 2006 motion to compel is denied without prejudice.

DATED: March 24, 2006. 

/001; ford.ddl

Case 2:04-cv-02344-LKK -JFM Document 90 Filed 03/27/06 Page 2 of 2