Bruce v. Woodford, et al.

Filing 131

ORDER Granting Defendants 129 Request to Respond to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel 128 , signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 5/14/13. Thirty-Day Deadline. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VINCENT C. BRUCE,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16
17

v.
JEANNE WOODFORD, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:07-cv-00269-BAM PC
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS REQUEST
TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
COMPEL (ECF No. 128, 129)
THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Vincent C. Bruce (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

18

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on

19

Plaintiff’s claims for relief under Section 1983 against: (1) Defendants Adams, Hense,

20

Ward, Clark, Fulks, Wan, Frauenheim, Lloren, Fields, and Tripp for retaliation against Plaintiff’s

21

exercise of his First Amendment rights; (2) Defendants Adams, Hense, Ward, Clark, Fulks,

22

Wan, Lloren, Fields, and Tripp for violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment;

23

and (3) Defendants Adams, Schottgen, and Fields for failing to provide Plaintiff with adequate

24

clothing in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

25

On May 31, 2012, the Court entered a Scheduling Order. Pursuant to that order, the deadline

26

to amend pleadings was November 30, 2012, the deadline to complete discovery was January 30,

27

2013, and the dispositive motion deadline was April 11, 2013. (Doc. 120).

28
1

On December 12, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to extend the scheduling order deadlines one-

1
2

hundred fifty (150) days. Plaintiff sought an extension because of filing deadlines in his Ninth Circuit

3

appeal of Bruce v. Cate, 3:09-cv-04649-JW. (ECF No. 121.)

4

On December 20, 2012, the Court partially granted Plaintiff’s motion to extend the remaining

5

discovery deadlines an additional sixty (60) days in consideration of the briefing schedule in Bruce v.

6

Cate. Based on the extension of time, the deadline to amend pleadings was January 29, 2013, the

7

deadline to complete discovery was April 1, 2013, and the deadline to file dispositive motions was

8

June 10, 2013. (ECF No. 123.)
On March 22, 2013, Plaintiff filed a second motion to extend the deadlines for completion of

9
10

discovery and for filing dispositive motions an additional ninety (90) days.
On March 25, 2013, the Court directed Defendants to file a response to Plaintiff’s second

11
12

request for an extension of time. (ECF No. 125.) In compliance with the Court’s order, Defendants

13

filed their opposition to the second request for an extension of time on April 8, 2013. (ECF No. 126.)
While Plaintiff’s second request for an extension of time was pending, Plaintiff filed the instant

14
15

motion to compel discovery on April 15, 2013. Plaintiff seeks to compel further responses to

16

interrogatories to Defendant Field and further responses to a request for production of documents,

17

which were both served on September 12, 2012. (ECF No. 128.)
On May 2, 2013, Defendants filed their opposition to the motion to compel discovery.

18
19

Defendants argued that Plaintiff’s motion was untimely because it was filed after the discovery

20

deadline of April 1, 2013. Defendants also argued that Plaintiff had failed to show good cause for his

21

second request for an extension of the discovery deadlines. However, Defendants asked that they be

22

granted leave to respond to the substance of Plaintiff’s motion to compel if the Court granted

23

Plaintiff’s second request for an extension of time. (ECF No. 130.)
On May 6, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiff’s second motion to extend the remaining filing

24
25

deadlines in this action. Based on that order, the deadline to complete discovery was extended to July

26

1, 2013, and the deadline to file dispositive motions was extended to September 9, 2013. (ECF No.

27

130.)

28
2

Given the extended discovery and filing deadlines in this action, Defendants’ request to

1
2

provide a substantive response to Plaintiff’s April 15, 2013 motion to compel is GRANTED.

3

Defendants shall file their opposition to Plaintiff’s motion to compel within thirty (30) days of the date

4

this order.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

Dated:

8

/s/ Barbara

May 14, 2013

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:

9

A. McAuliffe

10c20kb8554

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3