Ervin v. Merced Police Dept. et al

Filing 51

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Miscellaneous Discovery Motion 47 ; AMENDED Scheduling Order signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 11/18/2014. Nonexpert Discovery due by 2/1/2015; Dispositive Motions filed by 4/17/2015; Pretrial Conference set for 7/30/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 10 (GSA) before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin; Jury Trial set for 11/3/2015 at 08:30 AM in Courtroom 10 (GSA) before Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin. (Martinez, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

ELTON W. ERVIN,

10

Plaintiff,

11

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MISCELLANEOUS DISCOVERY
MOTION

v.

12
13

1:13-cv-446 GSA

MERCED POLICE DEPARTMENT et al.,

14

Defendants.

(Doc. 47)
AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER

15
16
17

I.

Introduction
This Court issued a scheduling order on February 7, 2014. (Doc. 32). Since that time,

18
19
20
21

there have been a variety of events that have taken place including Plaintiff’s arrest, and his
failure to keep the Court apprised of his address, that have delayed this case. As a result,
discovery has not been completed pursuant to the scheduling order previously issued.

22

On September 5, 2014, the Court ordered that both parties provide the Court with a status

23

report outlining what discovery was done, and what additional discovery needed to be completed.

24

(Doc. 42). In response, on September 22, 2014, Plaintiff filed a miscellaneous discovery motion

25
wherein he requests several documents from the Defendants and possibly other third parties.
26
27
28

(Doc. 47). On September 19, 2014 and November 12, 2014, Defendants filed responses wherein
they indicate that they still need to take Plaintiff’s deposition, and request that the scheduling
1

1

order be amended so that they may do so. (Docs. 45 and 50).

2
3

After reviewing the parties’ responses, the Court finds that the parties have established
good cause to amend the scheduling order so that limited discovery can be completed.

4
Specifically, Plaintiff may request the discovery outlined in his motion filed on September 22,
5
6

2014. (Doc. 47). However, this order is limited to giving Plaintiff the opportunity to request the

7

discovery. This order should not be construed as granting any of Plaintiff’s discovery requests.

8

Moreover, Plaintiff is advised that filing a motion on the Court’s docket is not the correct way to

9

request discovery. Accordingly, his motion for discovery is denied as incorrectly filed. Plaintiff

10

is advised that he must serve Defendants, or any other person or entity in possession of the items

11

sought, with his discovery requests directly. When doing so, he must follow the Federal Rules of

12
13
14

Civil Procedure to obtain the discovery he is seeking. Similarly, the Court will allow Defendants
additional time to take Plaintiff’s deposition as requested.
Accordingly, the Court amends the scheduling order issued on February 7, 2014 (Doc. 32)

15
16

as follows :

17

Non–expert discovery deadline: February 1, 2015

18

Dispositive motion filing deadline: April 17, 2015

19
Pretrial Conference: July 30, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 10
20
Trial: November 3, 2015 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 10

21

The non-expert discovery deadline is limited to the items listed above and requires that

22
23

any discovery motion be filed by February 1, 2015. Defendants are advised that if an order to

24

take Plaintiff’s deposition while he is in prison is required, they can file the appropriate motion

25

pursuant to the Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(a)(2)(B).

26

II.

Order

27
Based on the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that :
28
2

1) Plaintiff’s miscellaneous discovery motion (Doc. 47) is DENIED as incorrectly

1
2

filed. However, Plaintiff is given additional time to serve the discovery requests

3

outlined in his motion as directed above; and

4
2) The date in the scheduling order issued on February 7, 2014 (Doc. 32) is modified
5
in accordance with the instructions outlined in this order. All other orders

6
7

contained in the scheduling order issued on February 7, 2014, remain in full force

8

and effect.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
Dated:
12

November 18, 2014

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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