Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01412/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01412-9/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Khamkoth Keopadubsy
Plaintiff
Siemens Mobility, Inc.
Defendant

Document Text:

1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 The parties jointly request an extension of all pretrial deadlines until six months after an 

18 order resolving plaintiff’s anticipated motion for class certification “in the interest of conserving 

19 party resources.” Joint Stip. at 3, ECF No. 36. The request is denied without prejudice; it may 

20 be renewed when a motion has in fact been docketed. 

21 The court cautions the parties that pretrial deadlines set in a Rule 16 order can be extended 

22 only for “good cause,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4), which is primarily a question of the requesting 

23 parties’ “diligence,” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). 

24 In this case, deciding whether one or more parties have been “diligent” will include a review of 

25 what has occurred since this action was filed in July 2020, more than four years ago. 

26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

27 DATED: October 30, 2024. 

28 

Khamkoth Keopadubsy, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Siemens Mobility, Inc., et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:20-cv-01412-KJM-CKD 

ORDER 

Case 2:20-cv-01412-KJM-CKD Document 37 Filed 10/31/24 Page 1 of 1