Fields v. Junious et al

Filing 50

ORDER GRANTING Defendants' Second Motion for Modification of Schedule 49 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 11/28/11: Dispositive Motion Deadline is now set for December 2, 2011. (Hellings, J)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8

KEVIN E. FIELDS,

9
10
11

CASE NO. 1:09-CV-01771-AWI-DLB PC
Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
SECOND MOTION FOR MODIFICATION
OF SCHEDULE

v.
MAURICE JUNIOUS, et al.,

12

(DOC. 49)

Defendants.

13

Dispositive Motion Deadline: December 2,
2011
/

14
15

Plaintiff Kevin E. Fields (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California

16

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in

17

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

18

on Plaintiff’s complaint, filed October 8, 2009, against Defendants K. Foley, D. B. Hernandez, R.

19

Magvas, S. Marsh, L. Molina, and J. Tucker for violation of the Eighth Amendment. Pending

20

before the Court is Defendants’ second motion to modify the schedule, filed November 18, 2011.

21

Doc. 45.

22

The decision to modify a scheduling order is within the broad discretion of the district

23

court. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting Miller

24

v. Safeco Title Ins. Co., 758 F.2d 364, 369 (9th Cir. 1985)). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

25

Procedure 16, a pretrial scheduling order “shall not be modified except upon a showing of good

26

cause,” and leave of court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); Zivkovic v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 302 F.3d

27

1080, 1087-88 (9th Cir. 2002). Although “the existence or degree of prejudice to the party

28

opposing the modification might supply additional reasons to deny a motion, the focus of the
1

1

inquiry is upon the moving party’s reasons for seeking modification.” Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609.

2

Defendants seek a modification of the dispositive motion deadline from November 18,

3

2011 to December 2, 2011. Defendants request additional time to file the motion for summary

4

judgment because the Court did not grant the previous modification until November 9, 2011,

5

nine days prior to the deadline. The Court finds good cause. However, no further modification

6

will be granted.

7

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for modification of the

8

schedule, filed November 18, 2011, is granted. The dispositive motion deadline is December 2,

9

2011.

10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
3b142a

November 28, 2011

/s/ Dennis L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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