Corona v. Hunter et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Fernando Corona,
Plaintiff,
v.
Matt Hunter,
Defendant.
No. CV-23-01251-PHX-JAT
ORDER
Pending before the Court is Defendant Matt Hunter’s Motion for Leave to File an
Additional Motion in Limine. (Doc. 121). The Court now rules.
The parties met on October 17, 2025 to exchange exhibits, eliminate duplicate
exhibits, and discuss joint pretrial documents. (Doc. 121 at 2). Plaintiff’s counsel was
unprepared for that meeting. (Doc. 108 at 1–2). Given Plaintiff’s counsel’s lack of
preparation and subsequent conduct, the parties were unable to meet the Court’s original
October 27, 2025 deadline to file joint pretrial documents. (Doc. 108 at 2). To ensure that
joint, rather than separate, documents were filed without prejudicing the defense, the Court
extended the joint pretrial documents deadline to November 14, 2025, and instructed the
parties to meet in person by November 10, 2025 to discuss the drafted pretrial documents
and exchange exhibits. (Doc. 108 at 4). In that Order, the Court emphasized that, while the
Final Pretrial Order and other joint pretrial form deadline was extended, the motion in
limine deadline—November 7, 2025—would not be extended. (Doc. 108 at 3; Doc. 92).
Defendant filed six motions in limine by the November 7, 2025 deadline. He now
Case 2:23-cv-01251-JAT Document 122 Filed 11/14/25 Page 1 of 2

- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
moves the Court for a limited extension to that deadline so that he may file an additional
motion in limine. Defendant alleges that when the parties met on November 10, 2025 to
discuss the pretrial documents and complete the exchange of exhibits, Plaintiff’s counsel
“provided a new paper copy of his finalized trial exhibits, which included additional
documents that were not provided during the October 17, 2025, exchange and were
provided after the motion in limine deadline expired.” (Doc. 121 at 2). Defendant seeks to
preclude these additional documents, and argues there is good cause to extend the motion
in limine deadline because Plaintiff’s counsel presented these documents after the
November 7, 2025 deadline. (Doc. 121 at 2 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1)).
The Court agrees. Because Plaintiff’s counsel did not provide the documents
Defendant seeks to preclude until days after the original motion in limine deadline, the
Court will grant Defendant’s request for a limited extension to file his seventh motion in
limine.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File an Additional Motion
in Limine (Doc. 121) is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall file the additional motion in
limine by Monday, November 17, 2025.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s response to Defendant’s motions in
limine, including the seventh, to-be-filed motion, shall be due by the original response
deadline of November 21, 2025, pursuant to the Court’s September 8, 2025 Order. (Doc.
92).
Dated this 14th day of November, 2025.
Case 2:23-cv-01251-JAT Document 122 Filed 11/14/25 Page 2 of 2