Aluya v. Management & Training Corporation

Filing 42

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING IN PART 37 Stipulation to Amend Scheduling Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 12/5/2014. (Hall, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSEPH USUNUBU ALUYA,, Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 14 MANAGEMENT & TRAINING CORPORATION, AND JOHN DOES 1 – 9, 15 CASE NO. 1:13-CV-01345 AWI-JLT AMENDED ORDER GRANTING IN PART STIPULATION TO AMEND SCHEDULING ORDER (Doc. 37) Defendants. 16 Before The Court is the stipulation to amend the scheduling order to allow additional time 17 18 to conduct nonexpert discovery. (Doc. 37) The parties report that there are several outstanding 19 discovery requests including a Freedom of Information Act request to the Bureau of Prisons, a 20 subpoena duces tecum to The GEO group, a recent document production of 1,000 documents 21 which Plaintiff has not yet been able to complete review and a delayed deposition of Dr. Rucker, 22 the Chief of Medicine at TCI. (Id. at 2) Based upon these discovery issues, the parties propose 23 changes to the case schedule but fail to allow sufficient time between the hearing on dispositive 24 motions and the pretrial conference. Id. at 3. Likewise, the parties fail to explain why they need to 25 extend the deadline for non-expert discovery in order to evaluate whether motions to compel are 26 needed. Seemingly, the only change needed is an extension of time to file discovery motions. 27 /// 28 1 ORDER 2 3 Based upon the foregoing, the stipulation is GRANTED IN PART. The scheduling order (Doc. 20) is amended as follows: 4 5 1. The deadline to complete the deposition of Dr. Rucker is extended to December 31, 2. Expert disclosures SHALL be made no later than February 20, 20151 and rebuttal 2014; 6 7 expert disclosures SHALL be made no later than March 13, 2015. All expert discovery SHALL 8 be completed no later than March 27, 2015; 9 10 3. no later than May 27, 2014; 11 12 4. Dispositive motions SHALL be filed no later than May 4, 2015 and heard no later than June 22, 2015; 13 14 Non dispositive motions SHALL be filed no later than March 30, 2015 and heard 5. To the extent that other changes to the case schedule were requested, these requests are DENIED; 15 No other amendments to the case schedule are authorized. 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 18 December 5, 2014 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 The parties may continue to attempt to resolve the outstanding discovery issues—via amendment to the production request—despite the expiration of the non-expert discovery deadline. Likewise, Plaintiff may continue to defer GEO, Inc.’s deadline to produce records responsive to the outstanding subpoena duces tecum until he is confident the documents cannot be obtained from MTC. However, no further extensions of time to file non-dispositive motions will be granted. Thus, it behooves Plaintiff to insist on GEO’s compliance with the subpoena in relatively condensed time frame.

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?