Rodriguez v. Hubbard et al

Filing 156

ORDER Granting 155 Defendants' Motion to Modify Discovery and Scheduling Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 3/11/16. Discovery due by 6/27/2016, Dispositive Motions filed by 8/29/2016. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LUIS VALENZUELA RODRIGUEZ,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
HUBBARD, et al.,
Defendants.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:10-cv-00858 DAD DLB (PC)
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
TO MODIFY DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING
ORDER
(ECF No. 155)
Discovery Deadline: June 27, 2016
Dispositive Motion Deadline: August 29, 2016

17

Plaintiff Luis Valenzuela Rodriguez (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

18

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on

19

Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint against Defendants Biter, Phillips, Da Viega, Ozaeta, Betzinger,

20

Gregory, Garza, Wegman, Alic, Speidell and Rankin on claims of violation of the Free Exercise

21

Clause of the First Amendment, violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth

22

Amendment, retaliation in violation of the First Amendment, and deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s

23

safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

24
25
26

On January 30, 2015, the Court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 109.)
According to the Order, the deadline for the parties to complete discovery was set for June 29, 2015,
and the deadline to file dispositive motions was set to August 27, 2015.

27
28
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

On April 29, 2015, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. On April 30, 2015,
Defendants moved to modify the discovery and scheduling order. On May 4, 2015, the Court granted
the motion and extended the discovery deadline to August 31, 2015, and the dispositive motion
deadline to October 26, 2015. On September 1, 2015, Defendants filed a motion for judgment on the
pleadings. Also on September 1, 2015, the Court modified the scheduling order, and the discovery
deadline was extended to October 30, 2015, and the deadline for filing dispositive motions was
extended to December 28, 2015.
On October 22, 2015, Defendants filed a motion to further modify the discovery and
scheduling order. On October 28, 2015, Defendants’ motion was granted. The discovery deadline
was moved to January 29, 2016, and the dispositive motion was moved to March 28, 2016.
On February 9, 2016, the Court issued a Findings and Recommendation that recommended
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on exhaustion be granted and the claims be
dismissed without prejudice. The parties were granted thirty days to file objections, and to date, no
objections have been filed. The Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the District
Judge for review.
On March 9, 2016, Defendants filed the instant motion to modify the scheduling order.
Defendants state they intend to file a motion for summary judgment based on the merits of the action
and qualified immunity; however, the current motion for summary judgment based on exhaustion is
pending and has the potential of terminating the case. Therefore, Defendants argue that the deadlines
should be moved to permit the issue of exhaustion to be decided before Defendants are required to file
their motions for summary judgment on the merits. Defendants argue that this would avoid any
unnecessary expending of resources.
Modification of the pretrial scheduling order requires a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ. P.

24

16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the

25

party seeking the extension.’” Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th

26

Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992)). “If

27

the party seeking the modification ‘was not diligent, the inquiry should end’ and the motion to modify

28
2

1
2

should not be granted.” Id. In light of the above, the Court finds good cause to extend the deadlines
for discovery and dispositive motions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4).

3
4
5
6

ORDER
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Discovery and Scheduling Order (ECF No.
109) is modified as follows: the discovery cut-off shall be extended to June 27, 2016, and the deadline
to file dispositive motions shall be extended from March 28, 2016, to August 29, 2016.

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

March 11, 2016

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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