Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Law Offices Of Daniel Snyder x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Civil Rights: Employment | Oregon
Order on Motion for Extension of Discovery & PTO Deadlines
ORDER by Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai: Plaintiff filed a motion to extend pretrial deadlines in this case by ninety days. ECF No. 21 . On November 17, 2025, the Court, in adopting the parties' proposed lengthy pretrial schedule, warned the parties that "requests for extensions of the case management deadlines will only be granted with a strong showing of good cause." ECF No. 18 . Plaintiff filed her motion on July 30, 2026, one day before the deadline to complete fact discovery and twenty-four days after the deadline to file motions to compel. Plaintiff did not communicate any intent to extend case deadlines to Defendant until July 30, 2026, after Defendant pointed out that the parties needed to complete Plaintiff's deposition by July 31. Hernndez Decl. paras. 4-5, ECF No. 25 . The Court recognizes that Plaintiff's medical condition has delayed the conclusion of her deposition and that Plaintiff's co-counsel retired from law practice on the fact discovery deadline. Bastian Decl. paras. 6-12, ECF No. 22 . Plaintiff fails to explain, however, how these factors justify her failure to diligently seek modification of the case deadlines or justify her request to conduct depositions of other witnesses. The Court finds that Plaintiff therefore has not made the necessary showing of diligence and good cause to extend the pretrial deadlines. See Zivkovic v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) ("If the party seeking the modification 'was not diligent, the inquiry should end' and the motion to modify should not be granted.") (citation omitted). Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Discovery and Pretrial Deadlines (ECF No. 21 ) is DENIED. Defendant requests that the Court extend the case management deadlines only for the purpose of finishing Plaintiff's deposition. The Court grants that request. The parties have thirty days from the date of this Order to conclude Plaintiff's deposition. (bd)
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other | Oregon
Order on Cost Bill
ORDER: Defendant State of Oregon's Bill of Costs (ECF No. 111 ) is DENIED as untimely. Local Rule 54-1(a)(1) provides that a prevailing party may file a bill of costs "[n]ot later than 14 days after entry of judgment or receipt and docketing of the appellate court's mandate." The Court entered Judgment on 6/16/2026. ECF No. 110 . Plaintiff did not file a notice of appeal. The State did not file its Bill of Costs until 7/23/2026, well beyond the 14-day deadline. The State did not seek an extension or inform the Court of any intervening circumstances that would interfere with complying with the Local Rules. Ordered by Judge Michael J. McShane. (cp)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
Phone
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 UK may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.