Dodds v. Lascano et al

Filing 44

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 9/22/2011 granting 37 Motion and vacating 9/14/2010 Discovery and Scheduling Order and disregarding 31 Motion for Protective Order. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8

JAYMAR DODDS,

9
10
11

CASE NO. 1:09-CV-00656-AWI-DLB PC
Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION AND VACATING SEPTEMBER
14, 2010 DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING
ORDER (DOC. 37)

v.
E. LASCANO, et al.,

12

ORDER DISREGARDING DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AS
MOOT (DOC. 31)

Defendants.

13

/

14
15

Plaintiff Jaymar Dodds (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California

16

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), proceeding pro se in this civil rights

17

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was proceeding against Defendants E. Lascano,

18

J. Hamlin, and B. Williams. On September 21, 2011, the Court dismissed Defendant Williams

19

from this action. Doc. 43. Pending before the Court are 1) Defendant Williams’s motion for

20

protective order, filed December 10, 2010, and 2) Defendants’ motion to vacate the Court’s

21

Scheduling Order, filed April 6, 2011. Docs. 31, 37.

22

Defendant Williams moved the Court for a protective order, requesting a stay of

23

discovery pending resolution of Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Williams Mot. 3-4. Because

24

Defendant Williams was dismissed from this action, Defendant’s motion is moot. Accordingly,

25

it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Williams’s motion, filed December 10, 2010, is

26

disregarded.

27
28

Defendants contend in their April 6, 2011 motion that the Court’s Discovery and
Scheduling order, filed September 14, 2010, should be vacated pending the outcome of
1

1

Defendants’ motions to dismiss. Defs.’ Mot. 4. The Court granted Defendant Lascano and

2

Hamlin’s motion in part, and ordered Defendants to file an answer. Doc. 43. Good cause is

3

required to modify the Court’s schedule. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). Defendants Lascano and

4

Hamlin did not appear in this action until April 6, 2011, and have yet to file an answer. Good

5

cause exists to modify the Discovery and Scheduling order.

6

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to vacate the Court’s

7

September 14, 2010 Discovery and Scheduling Order is GRANTED, and that order is

8

VACATED.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
3b142a

September 22, 2011

/s/ Dennis L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2