Montiel v. Yates, et al.

Filing 69

ORDER Granting Defendants' 68 Motion to Modify Discovery and Scheduling Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 01/22/15. Discovery due by 3/4/2015, Dispositive Motions filed by 5/4/2015. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11

JESSE J. MONTIEL,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
vs.
YATES, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:11cv02145 LJO DLB PC
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY AND
SCHEDULING ORDER
(Document 68)

16
17

Plaintiff Jesse J. Montiel, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed

18

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 28, 2011. This action is

19

proceeding against Defendants Das and Green violation of the Eighth Amendment.

20
21
22

On December 2, 2014, the Court granted Defendants’ first motion to extend the discovery
and dispositive motion. The deadlines were extended by forty-five days, to February 2, 2015,
and April 2, 2015.

23

On January 21, 2015, Defendants filed a second motion to extend the discovery deadline
24
25
26
27
28

and dispositive motion deadline. Defendants request an extension of thirty days. The motion is
suitable for decision without an opposition pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).
Modification of the pretrial scheduling order requires a showing of good cause. Fed. R.
Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the
1

1
2
3
4
5

diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302
F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604,
607 (9th Cir. 1992)). “If the party seeking the modification ‘was not diligent, the inquiry should
end’ and the motion to modify should not be granted.” Id.
Here, Defendants’ counsel encountered an unexpected family medical emergency and

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

was in Southern California for eleven days in December. Fitzsimmons Decl. ¶ 3. As a result,
Counsel was forced to request an extension in this case, as well as others. Counsel needs
additional time to file a motion to compel, take Plaintiff’s deposition, and complete their motion
for summary judgment. Fitzsimmons Decl. ¶ 9.
The Court finds that good cause exists to modify the Discovery and Scheduling Order
and Defendants’ motion is GRANTED. The new dates are as follows:

13

Discovery Deadline:

March 4, 2015

14

Dispositive Motion Deadline:

May 4, 2015

15
16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Dennis

January 22, 2015

L. Beck

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2