O'Connell v. Hyatt Hotels

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that a “court may extend a scheduling order deadline on a showing ‘of good cause if the [deadline] cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension’”
• recognizing that a “court may extend a scheduling order deadline on a showing ‘of good cause if the [deadline] cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension’”
• recognizing that a “court may extend a scheduling order deadline on a showing of good cause if the deadline cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension” (cleaned up)
• noting that Rule 16(b) applies to motions to amend a complaint filed after the deadline set by the scheduling order
• noting that Rule 16(b) applies to motions to amend a complaint filed after the deadline set by the scheduling order
• noting that the Court in O’Connell refused “to address whether the amendment to the complaint would be ‘futile,’ because futility is a Rule 15(a) consideration, not a Rule 16(b) consideration”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).