Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Hashmi Law Firm x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Civil Rights: Accommodations | New York Western
Text Order
TEXT ORDER. Pursuant to the status report filed on July 30, 2026, the parties are requesting an extension of certain case management deadlines. (Dkt. 109). However, all of the deadlines at issue have expired under the operative Scheduling Order. (See Dkt. 95). Moreover, this is now the second time that the parties have requested a comprehensive, retroactive extension of these same deadlines. (See Dkt. 94). And in both instances, the parties did not request an extension until the Court sought an update on the status of the case. (See Dkt. 89; Dkt. 108).
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b), a scheduling order "may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent." Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). "Good cause depends on the diligence of the moving party" and "exists where the moving party is unable to comply with a required deadline despite the exercise of due diligence." Rupp v. City of Buffalo, 328 F.R.D. 69, 70 (W.D.N.Y. 2018) (quotations omitted). The Court's discretion to modify a scheduling order under Rule 16(b) is limited by the good cause requirement. Id. at 71. Further, "[a] scheduling order entered by a court is not a frivolous piece of paper, idly entered, which can be cavalierly disregarded by counsel without peril," and "the dates contained in such an order are not mere suggestive guideposts." Hassoun v. Searls, 467 F. Supp. 3d 111, 134 (W.D.N.Y. 2020) (quotations omitted).
Here, the Court cannot determine whether the parties have acted diligently because their request for an extension does not include any explanation of why they were unable to meet the deadlines in the Scheduling Order. The parties have accordingly failed to demonstrate good cause. To the extent the parties seek additional modifications to the operative Scheduling Order, they must make such request through a motion in which they demonstrate good cause. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Colleen D. Holland on 8/3/2026. (BNS)
TEXT ORDER re 109 STATUS REPORT. The Parties have advised the Court that the matter is not ready for trial and that they wish to continue discovery. Therefore, the Court refers this matter back to Judge Holland to address any remaining scheduling and discovery matters. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Frank P. Geraci, Jr. on 7/31/2026. (EMC)
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
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 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.