Palmer v. Vasquez et al

Filing 42

ORDER GRANTING 41 Stipulation to Amend the Scheduling Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 1/28/2015. Discovery Deadlines: Non-expert 4/3/2015; Expert 6/19/2015. Non-Dispositive Motion Deadlines: Filed by 7/3/2015; Hearing by 7/31/2015. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BENITA PALMER,

12

Plaintiff,

13

Case No.: 1:13-cv-01400 AWI JLT

v.

14
15

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO
AMEND THE SCHEDULING ORDER
(Doc. 41)

SALVADOR VASQUEZ, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Before the Court is the stipulation of counsel to amend the scheduling order to allow time

18

to resolve and ongoing discovery dispute (See Doc. 40) and to allow completion of non-expert

19

discovery, which has been delayed due to the illness of Plaintiffs’ counsel.1 (Doc. 41)

20

In light of the fact counsel do not seek to modify the dates related to the dispositive

21

motions, the pretrial conference or the trial date and because Court finds good cause has been

22

shown, the Court ORDERS the scheduling order (Doc. 33) amended as follows:

23

1.

All non-expert discovery SHALL be completed no later than April 3, 2015;

24

2.

Expert witnesses SHALL be disclosed no later than April 10, 2015 with any

25

rebuttal experts disclosed no later than May 2, 2015;

26

3.

27

1

28

All expert discovery SHALL be completed no later than June 19, 2015;

The Court is not clear how counsel’s illness in December impacted his ability to comply with the Court’s
November 6, 2014 order but presumes that it played a role.

1
2
3

4.

Any non-dispositive motions SHALL be filed no later than July 3, 2015 and heard

no later than July 31, 2015.
Absolutely no other amendments to the scheduling order are authorized2 and no

4

further requests for amendments—even those made via stipulation—to the scheduling

5

order will be entertained absent a showing of exceptional good cause.

6

Counsel are strongly urged to complete their discovery efforts as soon as practicable.

7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 28, 2015

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2

25
26
27
28

In granting this stipulation, the Court appreciates—and presumes counsel does too—that this new schedule
means that dispositive motions will likely have to be filed and decided without the benefit of expert discovery and the
failure to complete this discovery SHALL NOT constitute good cause to extend any deadlines related to any
dispositive motion, including decision on any such motion. Likewise, because the new schedule extends the deadline
for filing and deciding non-dispositive motions beyond the deadlines related to dispositive motions, the existence of a
discovery dispute or the failure to have a decision on a non-dispositive motion SHALL NOT be grounds to extend
any deadlines related to any dispositive motion, including decision on any such motion.