Certified Nutraceuticals Inc. v. The Clorox Company ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CERTIFIED NUTRACEUTICALS, INC., Case No.: 3:18-cv-00744-W-KSC a California Corporation, 12 ORDER GRANTING JOINT Plaintiff, 13 MOTION TO AMEND v. SCHEDULING ORDER TO 14 CONTINUE PRETRIAL DATES THE CLOROX COMPANY, a Delaware 15 [Doc. No. 137] Corporation, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion to Amend Scheduling Order to 19 Continue Pretrial Dates (the “Joint Motion” or “Jt. Mot.”). Doc. No. 137. The parties 20 jointly request that the remaining pretrial dates set forth in the Court’s November 26, 21 2019 Scheduling Order Regulating Discovery and Other Pretrial Proceedings (Doc. No. 22 61) be continued until after the District Court has ruled upon defendants’ currently- 23 pending Motions for Summary Judgment. Jt. Mot. at 3. For the reasons that follow, and 24 good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the parties’ Joint Motion. 25 It is an appropriate exercise of this Court’s discretion to grant a stay or continuance 26 “when it serves the interests of judicial economy and efficiency.” Rivers v. Walt Disney 27 Co., 980 F. Supp. 1358, 1360 (C.D. Cal. 1997); see also Single Chip Sys. Corp. v. 28 Intermec IP Corp., 495 F. Supp. 2d 1052, 1057 (S.D. Cal. 2007) (noting Court’s authority 1 to control its docket for the “economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for 2 litigants”) (citation omitted). 3 Here, all defendants have moved for summary judgment, and those motions are set 4 for hearing on October 19, 2020. Jt. Mot. at 3. Pursuant to the Scheduling Order 5 currently in place, the parties will be required to make their initial pretrial disclosures by 6 November 2, 2020 – just two weeks after the hearing. Id.; see also Doc. No. 61 at 4. The 7 pretrial conference is scheduled approximately a month later, on December 9, 2020. 8 Doc. No. 61 at 5. As the parties explain, this schedule “creates the clear potential for 9 unnecessary work by the parties and the Court if [d]efendants’ motions are granted in 10 whole or in part.” Jt. Mot. at 3. The parties have met and conferred, and all are amenable 11 to continuing the remaining deadlines – all of which relate to trial preparation – until after 12 a ruling on the summary-judgment motions is issued. Jt. Mot. at 2, 3. Thus, no party will 13 be unfairly prejudiced by this continuance. See Single Chip Systems, 495 F. Supp. 2d at 14 1057 (noting that the Court should consider prejudice to any party when determining 15 whether to stay proceedings). 16 Accordingly, the Court finds there is good cause to grant the requested 17 continuance. The following pretrial dates are hereby VACATED: 18 November 2, 2020: Deadline to comply with pretrial disclosure requirements under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(3); 19 20 November 9, 2020: Deadline to meet and take the action required under Local Rule 16.1(f)(4); 21 22 November 16, 2020: Deadline for plaintiff to provide a proposed pretrial order to defendants; 23 24 November 23, 2020: Deadline to lodge the proposed pretrial order, including any objections thereto; 25 26 December 9, 2020: Deadline to submit informal letter briefs to the Honorable Thomas J. Whelan; and 27 28 December 14, 2020: Final Pretrial Conference. 1 Counsel for all parties shall jointly contact the chambers of the Honorable Thomas 2 || J. Whelan within three (3) business days of a ruling on the pending Motions for 3 ||Summary Judgment (Doc. Nos. 117, 120), at which time the foregoing pretrial deadlines 4 || will be reset if necessary. 5 ORDER 6 For the reasons set forth above, the parties’ Joint Motion to Amend Scheduling 7 || Order to Continue Pretrial Dates (Doc. No. 137) is GRANTED. 8 || IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: October 15, 2020 te Ye ) 10 Mfficae _———_ Hori. Karen S. Crawford United States Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28