ORDER AND REASONS

Before the Court is a joint motion from plaintiffs Margaret and Henry Walet and defendants EHP NOLA Hotel LLC, Trisura Specialty Insurance Company, and Bill Kaelin Marketing, LLC to continue the proceedings under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4).¹ In the alternative, the parties request a joint status conference to discuss scheduling. For the following reasons, the Court grants the motion to continue.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs allege that in July 2023 while they were seated on a couch in the lobby of the Troubador Hotel, a guitar mounted to the wall fell and struck Margaret Walet on the head. The Walets sued in Louisiana state court on June 28, 2024.² Defendants removed to federal court under diversity jurisdiction on August 27, 2024.³ The Court then thrice granted plaintiffs extensions of the deadline for amendments to pleadings, third-party actions, crossclaims, and counterclaims.⁴ In April 2025, plaintiffs amended their complaint, adding Bill Kaelin Marketing, LLC and EcoGreen Construction Services, LLC (EcoGreen).⁵ EcoGreen had filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy two months prior, in February 2025.⁶

In August 2025, plaintiffs filed an unopposed motion to stay the proceedings, which the Court granted as to the bankrupt defendant EcoGreen and denied as to the remainder of the parties.⁷ Less than two weeks later, the parties filed a joint motion for continuance, asserting three grounds: that plaintiff Margaret Walet had a two-level cervical fusion on June 30, 2025 and cannot participate in a Rule 35 medical examination, that EcoGreen‘s bankruptcy proceedings have hampered discovery access, and that Bill Kaelin Marketing has only recently answered the lawsuit and has not had a fair opportunity to participate in the proceedings.⁸

The Court considers the motion below.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

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 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). In decided whether to grant a continuance, the Court‘s “judgment range is exceedingly wide, for . . . [it] must consider not only the facts of the particular case but also all of the demands on counsel‘s time and the court‘s.” Streber v. Hunter, 221 F.3d 701, 736 (5th Cir. 2000) (quoting HC Gun & Knife Shows, Inc. v. City of Houston, 201 F.3d 544, 549-50 (5th Cir. 2000) (cleaned up)).

III. DISCUSSION

The Court grants the joint motion to continue trial and all associated deadlines. The Court finds that plaintiff Margaret Walet‘s recent surgery would preclude her participation in a Rule 35 medical examination. Therefore, the Court finds that the parties have good cause for the continuance and cannot reasonably meet the current deadlines despite their diligence. See S&W Enters., L.L.C., 315 F.3d at 535.

IV. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the joint motion to continue proceedings. The new scheduling conference will be held BY TELEPHONE on September 23, 2025 at 10:00 am for the purpose of re-scheduling the pre-trial conference and trial on the merits, and for a discussion of the status of the case and discovery deadlines. All deadlines established in the scheduling order on November 15, 2024 which have not expired are reset. The parties shall call in for the teleconference using phone number (833) 990-9400 and access code 124518418. The Court will be represented by its Case Manager.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this 18th day of August, 2025.

SARAH S. VANCE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Notes

R. Doc. 12.

R. Doc. 1, at 1.

R. Docs. 1, 15, 17, & 20.

R. Doc. 25.

R. Doc. 37, at 2.

R. Doc. 38.

R. Doc. 40-1, at 2-3.