Ramachandran v. City of Los Altos ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 SATISH RAMACHANDRAN, Case No. 18-cv-01223-VKD 9 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 10 v. CONTINUE TRIAL DATE AND RELATED DATES 11 CITY OF LOS ALTOS, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 266 Defendants. 12 13 14 Before the Court is plaintiff Satish Ramachandran’s motion to continue the trial date and 15 related dates, which the Court treats as a motion for administrative relief under Civil Local Rule 7- 16 11. Dkt. No. 266. Defendants oppose this motion. Dkt. No. 268. 17 This case was filed on February 25, 2018 and has been pending now for nearly four years. 18 Dkt. No. 1. After two continuances, the period for fact discovery closed on January 29, 2020. 19 Dkt. Nos. 30, 88, 117. All that remains for trial are Mr. Ramachandran’s claims against 20 defendants Mr. Ballard, Mr. Jordan, and the City of Los Altos for violation of his First 21 Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Dkt. No. 199 at 31. 22 In January 2021, the Court set trial to start on October 18, 2021. Dkt. No. 206. In August 23 2021, Mr. Ramachandran’s then-counsel moved to withdraw, citing difficulties in representing 24 him. Dkt. No. 233. The Court granted counsel’s motion and continued the trial date to December 25 2021. Dkt. No. 246. Less than two months later, Mr. Ramachandran’s new counsel also moved to 26 withdraw, also citing difficulties in representing him. Dkt. No. 254. The Court granted counsel’s 27 motion to withdraw and continued the trial to February 22, 2022. Dkt. No. 260. In so doing, the The Court is unwilling to delay setting this matter for trial yet again 1 so that Mr. Ramachandran might persuade yet another counsel to represent him, only to have these same circumstances repeat 2 themselves in a few weeks or months. Instead, the Court will vacate the current pretrial conference and trial dates and set this matter for 3 trial on February 22, 2021, which is the earliest trial date available on the Court’s calendar. Mr. Ramachandran may retain counsel if 4 he wishes, but the Court will not adjust the trial date to accommodate that effort or new counsel’s schedule. Mr. 5 Ramachandran must prepare to proceed with or without counsel. 6 Dkt. No. 260 at 4. 7 The Court denies Mr. Ramachandran’s present motion to continue the trial date and related 8 dates because he has failed to demonstrate good cause for the requested continuance. “A schedule 9 may only be modified for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). 10 “Rule 16(b)’s ‘good cause’ standard primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking 11 amendment.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation 12 omitted). 13 Mr. Ramachandran has failed to demonstrate good cause for continuance of the trial date to 14 accommodate his new counsel’s schedule. First, Mr. Ramachandran’s request ignores the Court’s 15 admonition that it would not “adjust the trial date to accommodate [the retention of new counsel] 16 or new counsel’s schedule.” Dkt. No. 260 at 4. Second, new counsel accepted this representation 17 with the knowledge that trial was scheduled for February 2022 and that this Court had indicated 18 that there would be no further delays. Dkt. No. 260. Third, all that remains for trial is the single 19 issue of whether Mr. Ramachandran’s First Amendment rights were violated, undermining Mr. 20 Ramachandran’s arguments about the need for extensive preparation. See Dkt. No. 199 at 19–20, 21 30–31. Finally, the extended history of this case, included repeated delays occasioned by Mr. 22 Ramachandran’s own conduct, indicates a lack of diligence on his part in attempting to meet the 23 scheduled deadlines.1 24 Accordingly, the Court denies Mr. Ramachandran’s motion to continue the trial date and 25 related dates. Trial will proceed on February 22, 2022, as previously scheduled. See Dkt. No. 26 27 1 The case has been pending nearly four years, significantly longer than the three-year period of 1 260. The pretrial conference remains set for January 27, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. See also Judge 2 || DeMarchi’s Standing Order re Pretrial Preparation. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 Dated: December 22, 2021 5 6 VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI 7 United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 = 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28