Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 15, 2020

ESI Cases and Accessories, Inc. v. Home Depot Product Authority, LLC

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:18-cv-11507
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In ESI Cases v. Home Depot, Judge Furman granted one final 30-day discovery extension and adjourned the pretrial conference.

Who this affects

The parties, ESI Cases and Accessories, Inc. and Home Depot Product Authority, LLC, were affected by the shortened discovery extension and the rescheduled pretrial conference.

What happened

In ESI Cases and Accessories, Inc. v. Home Depot Product Authority, LLC, the parties jointly requested a 60-day extension of the discovery deadline to complete inventory inspections, document production, and depositions.

The court noted that the parties had already received two extensions and had not shown the required good reason for another one. It also said the request was late under the court’s rules.

Judge Jesse M. Furman nevertheless granted one final 30-day extension because of complications from the public health situation and an upcoming settlement conference. He adjourned the pretrial conference to October 22, 2020, and stated that no further extensions would be granted.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
ESI Cases and Accessories, Inc. v. Home Depot Product Authority, LLC · No. 1:18-cv-11507
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
Sept. 15, 2020

Background

The parties jointly requested a 60-day extension of the fact-discovery deadline. They said the additional time was needed to complete an agreed procedure for inspecting inventory, produce documents, and conduct depositions of corporate representatives for both sides. The parties had already received two earlier extensions.

Court’s analysis

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4), a case schedule may be changed only for good cause and with the judge’s consent. The court explained that good cause depends on the moving party’s diligence. It found that the parties had not made any effort to show good cause and stated that the request was also late under the court’s rules. On those grounds, the court said it could deny the request altogether.

The court nevertheless considered the complications arising from the public health situation and the parties’ scheduled settlement conference. As a courtesy, it granted one final 30-day extension of the fact-discovery deadline. The court stated that no further extensions would be granted.

Ruling

Judge Jesse M. Furman granted one final 30-day extension of fact discovery, rather than the requested 60-day extension. He adjourned the pretrial conference from September 24, 2020, to October 22, 2020, at 3:45 p.m. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate ECF No. 98.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.