Mount v. Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, et al

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

DR. DELORA MOUNT

CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS

NO. 25-1377
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER, ET
AL.

SECTION “R” (4)
ORDER AND REASONS

Before the Court is a joint motion from plaintiff Dr. Delora Mount and
defendants Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center and Louisiana
Children’s Medical Center to amend the Court’s scheduling order and reset
trial and all remaining discovery and pre-trial deadlines.
1
The Court denies
the motion.
Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[a]
scheduling order may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s
consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The “good cause standard requires the
party seeking relief to show that the deadlines cannot reasonably be met
despite the diligence of the party needing the extension.” S&W Enters.,
L.L.C. v. SouthTrust Bank, NA, 315 F.3d 533, 535 (5th Cir. 2003) (cleaned

1
R. Doc. 37.
Case 2:25-cv-01377-SSV-KWR Document 38 Filed 06/08/26 Page 1 of 3

2

up). Whether to grant or deny a continuance is within the sound discretion
of the trial court. United States v. Alix, 86 F.3d 429, 434 (5th Cir. 1996).
The Court finds that the parties have not met the good cause standard
here. See S&W Enters., L.L.C., 315 F.3d at 535. The parties lament that
production of ESI is taking longer than expected and that the scheduling of
depositions for out-of-state witnesses is difficult. It appears that the parties
have not scheduled a single deposition and have given no indication of how
many depositions they require. As stated in the scheduling order of October
22, 2025, “[t]his case does not involve extensive documentary evidence,
depositions or other discovery.”
2
The Court suspects that discovery here has
been excessive. The parties have already had seven months to work on
discovery, and a month and a half remains before the close of discovery on
July 21, 2026.
The Court DENIES the motion to modify the scheduling order and
imposes the following limitations on discovery. No additional discovery
requests under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 33, 34, or 36 may be
propounded. The only discovery permitted to go forward other than
completing responses to already-issued discovery requests are depositions.
The parties must meet and confer to agree to a deposition schedule within

2
R. Doc. 16.
Case 2:25-cv-01377-SSV-KWR Document 38 Filed 06/08/26 Page 2 of 3

3
seven days of the issuance of this Order, and all depositions must be
completed by the existing deadline. The Court notes that out-of-state
witnesses can be subpoenaed pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
45(b)(2) (“A subpoena may be served at any place within the United States.”),
and 45(c)(1) (“A subpoena may command a person to attend a . . .
deposition . . . within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or
regularly transacts business in person”).
New Orleans, Louisiana, this __ day of June, 2026.
_____________________
SARAH S. VANCE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
8th
Case 2:25-cv-01377-SSV-KWR Document 38 Filed 06/08/26 Page 3 of 3