Davis v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

Background

Experian Information Solutions, Inc. moved to amend the pretrial scheduling order. It asked to change the dispositive-motions deadline from September 15, 2022, to the earliest available date on Chief Judge Schiltz’s dispositive-motions calendar, which was the week of January 9, 2023. Regina Davis opposed the motion. A hearing had been scheduled for September 28, but the court determined that a hearing was unnecessary and canceled it.

The scheduling order stated that all dispositive motions had to be served, filed, and heard by September 15, 2022. It also warned that scheduling a dispositive motion generally required three to four months’ advance notice. Experian’s counsel said that he did not realize until September 6 that the motion also had to be heard by the deadline. Experian learned that the earliest available hearing date was in January 2023 and filed its motion the next day.

Legal standard

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) and the applicable local rule, a scheduling order may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent. The primary measure of good cause is the moving party’s diligence in trying to meet the scheduling order’s requirements. The court explained that carelessness is inconsistent with diligence and generally means that the court need not consider prejudice to the opposing party.

Ruling

The court concluded that Experian’s failure to carefully read the scheduling order was carelessness and did not establish good cause for the requested extension, which would have delayed the deadline by nearly four months. Because Experian did not establish good cause, the court did not address Experian’s other arguments. Dulce J. Foster, United States Magistrate Judge, canceled the September 28 hearing and denied Experian’s motion to amend the pretrial scheduling order.