Misko v. Sullivan et al
Filing
64
AMENDED DISCOVERY and SCHEDULING ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 5/19/2014. Discovery Deadline: 11/18/2014; Dispositive Motion Deadline: 2/18/2015. (Marrujo, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
11
JOHN T. MISKO,
Plaintiff,
12
13
14
vs.
WILLIAM SULLIVAN, et al.,
15
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1:10-cv-00713-LJO-BAM PC
AMENDED DISCOVERY AND
SCHEDULING ORDER
Exhaustion Motion Filing Deadline: August 18, 2014
Discovery Deadline: November 18, 2014
Dispositive Motion Deadline: February 18, 2015
16
17
Plaintiff John T. Misko (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California
18
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this
19
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Following summary judgment in favor of
20
Defendants Priest and Tate, this action currently proceeds against Defendants Cleinlin and
21
Williams for deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
On April 21, 2014, Defendant Williams answered the amended complaint.1 However, the
22
23
Discovery and Scheduling Order in this action has expired, including the discovery and
24
dispositive motion deadlines. As Defendant Williams was part of the same series of events
25
previously at issue in this action, the Court directed the parties to file a status report addressing
26
what, if any, additional discovery is necessary for the claim against Defendant Williams. (ECF
27
No. 60.)
28
1
On May 15, 2014, the undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations that Defendant Cleinlin be dismissed
from this action for failure to effectuate service. (ECF No. 62.)
1
1
On May 14, 2014, Defendant Williams filed a status report and requested an opportunity
2
to propound written discovery on Plaintiff. Defendant Williams also indicated that it may be
3
necessary to depose Plaintiff in order to prepare a motion for summary judgment. Defendant
4
Williams therefore requests sufficient time to propound written discovery and, if necessary,
5
depose Plaintiff. (ECF No. 61.)
6
7
8
9
10
11
On May 15, 2014, Plaintiff filed a status report, but was unable to provide information
regarding discovery status. (ECF No. 63.)
Having considered the parties’ reports, the Court finds it appropriate to issue an Amended
Discovery and Scheduling Order, which is limited to the claim against Defendant Williams.
Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 1, 16, and 26−36, discovery on the claim
against Defendant Williams shall proceed as follows:
12
Discovery Procedures:
13
1. Discovery requests shall be served by the parties pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
14
Procedure 5 and Local Rule 135. Discovery requests and responses shall not be filed with the
15
Court unless required by Local Rules 250.2, 250.3 and 250.4.
16
2. Responses to written discovery requests shall be due forty−five (45) days after the
17
request is first served. Boilerplate objections are disfavored and may be summarily overruled by
18
the Court. Responses to document requests shall include all documents within a party's
19
possession, custody or control. Fed. R. Civ. P.34(a)(1). Documents are deemed within a party's
20
possession, custody or control if the party has actual possession, custody or control thereof, or
21
the legal right to obtain the property on demand. Amendments to discovery responses served
22
after the filing of and in response to a motion to compel are strongly disfavored, absent good
23
faith. The parties are required to act in good faith during the course of discovery and the failure
24
to do so may result in the payment of expenses pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
25
37(a)(5) or other appropriate sanctions authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the
26
Local Rules.
27
28
3. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2)(B), Defendant may depose
Plaintiff and any other witness confined in a prison upon condition that, at least fourteen (14)
2
1
days before such a deposition, Defendant serves all parties with the notice required by Federal
2
Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(1).
3
4. If discovery disputes arise, the parties shall comply with all pertinent rules including
4
Rules 5, 7, 11, 26, and 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules 110, 130, 131, 133,
5
135, 142, 144, and 230(l) of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court,
6
Eastern District of California. A discovery motion that does not comply with applicable rules
7
will be stricken and may result in imposition of sanctions. However, unless otherwise ordered,
8
Local Rule 251 shall not apply, and the requirement set forth in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
9
26 and 37 of a good faith conference or attempt to confer with the other party to resolve the
10
dispute shall not apply. Voluntary compliance with this provision of Rules 26 and 37 is
11
encouraged, and if the Court deems it appropriate in any given case, it will reimpose the good
12
faith meet and confer requirement.
13
Filing Deadlines:
14
6. The deadline for filing motions for summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 for
15
16
failure to exhaust administrative remedies is August 18, 2014.
7. The deadline for the completion of all discovery, including filing all motions to
17
compel discovery, is November 18, 2014. Absent good cause, discovery motions will not be
18
considered if filed after the discovery deadline. Therefore, discovery requests and deposition
19
notices must be served sufficiently in advance of the discovery deadline to permit time for a
20
response and time to prepare and file a motion to compel.
21
22
23
24
8. The deadline for filing all dispositive motions (other than a motion for summary
judgment for failure to exhaust) is February 18, 2015.
9. A request for an extension of a deadline set in this order must be filed on or before the
expiration of the deadline in question and will only be granted on a showing of good cause.
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Barbara
May 19, 2014
A. McAuliffe
_
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?