Bryant v. Gallagher et al

Filing 172

ORDER Setting Dispositive Motion Deadline, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 11/10/2014. Dispositive Motions filed by 2/10/2015. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEVIN DARNELL BRYANT, 12 13 14 15 Plaintiff, v. GALLAGHER, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 1:11-cv-00446-LJO-BAM PC ORDER SETTING DISPOSITIVE MOTION DEADLINE Deadline: February 10, 2015 Plaintiff Kevin Darnell Bryant, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed 19 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s first 20 amended complaint, filed on July 5, 2011, against Defendant Romero for deliberate indifference to 21 serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against Defendants Gallagher and 22 Romero for conspiracy, retaliation in violation of the Eighth Amendment and failure to protect in 23 violation of the Eighth Amendment. 24 On December 19, 2012, the Court vacated the dispositive motion deadline in order to resolve 25 multiple pending motions to compel. (ECF No. 93.) As of the date of this order, all outstanding 26 discovery motions have been resolved. Accordingly, the Court finds it appropriate and necessary to 27 reset the dispositive motion deadline. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16. The deadline for filing all pre-trial 28 dispositive motions shall be February 10, 2015. A request for an extension of this deadline must be 1 1 filed on or before the expiration of the deadline. However, the parties are advised that an extension of 2 time will only be granted upon a clear showing of good cause. 3 4 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Barbara November 10, 2014 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?