Alfaro v. McGuinness et al
Filing
30
ORDER Granting 29 Request to Reopen Discovery for the Limited Purpose of Taking Plaintiff's Deposition and to Extend the Deadline for Dispositive Motions, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 12/9/14. (Verduzco, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JESSE ALFARO,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
v.
WILLIAM J. MCGUINNESS, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 1:12-cv-00568-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST
TO REOPEN DISCOVERY FOR THE LIMITED
PURPOSE OF TAKING PLAINTIFF’S
DEPOSITION AND TO EXTEND THE
DEADLINE FOR DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
(ECF No. 29.)
19
I.
20
Plaintiff Jesse Alfaro (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in
Background
21
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendants
22
McGuinness, Moon, Neubarth, John Doe and Jane Doe for deliberate indifference to serous medical
23
needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
24
On February 19, 2014, the Court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order. Pursuant to that
25
order, discovery closed on October 19, 2014,1 and the dispositive motion deadline is December 29,
26
2014. (ECF No. 20.)
27
28
1
October 19, 2014, was a Sunday.
1
On August 20, 2014, the Court granted Defendants’ motion to compel Plaintiff’s responses to
1
2
discovery. Pursuant to that order, Plaintiff’s discovery responses were due within thirty days
3
following service of the Court’s order. (ECF No. 26.) Plaintiff did not provide discovery responses.
4
(ECF No. 29-1, Lewis Dec. ¶ 7.)
On September 23, 2014, Defendants served Plaintiff with a Notice of Deposition for October
5
6
20, 2014. Plaintiff arrived forty minutes late and refused to be deposed due to his “medical
7
condition.” (Id. ¶ 9 and Ex. 1.)
On November 19, 2014, Defendants McGuinness, Moon and Neubarth filed the instant motion
8
9
to reopen discovery for the limited purpose of deposing Plaintiff and to extend the dispositive motion
10
deadline 120 days. (ECF No. 29.) The Court finds a response unnecessary and the motion is deemed
11
submitted.2 Local Rule 230(l).
12
II.
Discussion
13
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b), a scheduling order “may be modified only
14
for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The “good cause” standard
15
“primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the amendment.” Johnson v. Mammoth
16
Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). The court may modify the scheduling order “if it
17
cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.” Id. If the party
18
was not diligent, the inquiry should end. Id.
19
The Court finds good cause to extend the discovery and dispositive motion deadlines in this
20
matter. Defendants have been diligent in pursuing discovery in this matter, but have been unable to
21
complete Plaintiff’s deposition through no fault of their own. According to the record, Plaintiff has
22
not responded to written discovery despite a court order and has not allowed for the completion of his
23
deposition. (ECF No. 29-1, Lewis Dec. ¶¶ 7-9 and Ex. 1.) The deposition transcript reflects that
24
Plaintiff sought a continuation of his deposition due to medical reasons and the deposition was
25
terminated. (ECF No. 29-1, Ex. 1, Pl’s Dep. p. 8:2-2.) Defendants therefore require an extension of
26
27
28
2
Plaintiff will not be prejudiced by the inability to respond. Defendants’ request to reopen discovery is limited in scope
and is necessary because of Plaintiff’s actions in this case.
2
1
the discovery deadline, which has passed, to complete Plaintiff’s deposition. In light of that extension,
2
Defendants also require a corresponding extension of the dispositive motion deadline.
3
III.
4
For the reasons stated, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
5
1. Defendants’ motion to reopen discovery for the limited purpose of taking Plaintiff’s
deposition is GRANTED;
6
7
2. Discovery is reopened for sixty (60) days from the date of this order for the sole purpose of
deposing Plaintiff; and
8
9
Conclusion and Order
3. The dispositive motion deadline is extended one-hundred twenty (120) days from the date
of this order.
10
11
12
13
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Barbara
December 9, 2014
A. McAuliffe
_
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?