Foster v. Vasquez et al

Filing 46

ORDER Denying 42 Motion, signed by Chief Judge Ralph R. Beistline on 09/08/14. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MICHAEL FOSTER, Case No. 1:10-cv-01830-RRB Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION AT DOCKET 42 vs. CAPTAIN F. VASQUEZ; et al., Defendants. At Docket 42 Defendants have moved to modify the scheduling order. The motion is predicated upon the assumption that Plaintiff would be permitted to amend his complaint to add Warden Kathleen Allison as a defendant. The Court having denied Plaintiff’s motion to add Warden Allison,1 there is no necessity for amending the scheduling order in toto. The Court has, however, determined that the interests of justice would be served by extending the date for filing dispositive motions through and including October 3, 2014. Accordingly, except as provided above, the Motion to Modify the Scheduling Order at Docket 42 is DENIED, as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of September, 2014. /s/ RALPH R. BEISTLINE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 Docket 45. ORDER DENYING MOTION AT DOCKET 42

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?