Stewart v. Holland et al

Filing 74

ORDER GRANTING Defendants' Second Ex Parte Request to Modify the Discovery and Scheduling Order signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 9/26/2018. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 TRACY STEWART, 10 11 12 13 Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 1:14-cv-00322-DAD-BAM (PC) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ SECOND EX PARTE REQUEST TO MODIFY THE DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING ORDER K. HOLLAND, et al., (Doc. No. 73) Defendants. 14 15 16 17 Plaintiff Tracy Stewart is a state prisoner who is currently proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 4, 2017, the Court issued a discovery and scheduling order. (Doc. No. 38.) 18 Very shortly thereafter, this matter was stayed pending Alternative Dispute Resolution. On 19 February 8, 2018, the stay was lifted, and the discovery and scheduling order deadlines were 20 amended. (Doc. No. 54.) 21 22 23 On July 18, 2018, Defendants sought an extension of certain deadlines in the discovery and scheduling order. (Doc. No. 67.) On July 19, 2018, that order was granted. (Doc. No. 68.) Currently before the Court is Defendants’ second ex parte request to modify the discovery 24 and scheduling order, filed on September 25, 2018. (Doc. No. 73.) The Court finds that no 25 response to the motion is necessary, and Plaintiff shall not be prejudiced by consideration of the 26 motion. Local Rule 230(l). 27 28 Defendants seek for the Court to vacate the deadlines for the completion of discovery and filing any dispositive motions other than a motion for summary judgment for the failure to 1 1 exhaust administrative remedies. Defendants assert that they require the Court’s ruling on the 2 pending motion for summary judgment for the failure to exhaust administrative remedies, as that 3 ruling will potentially narrow the issues for Plaintiff’s deposition and other discovery, and will 4 allow for a streamlined subsequent summary judgment motion, if any. 5 6 The Court finds good cause to grant the request, based on Defendants’ diligence, efficiency, and judicial economy. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). 7 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 8 1. 9 10 11 12 13 Defendants’ second ex parte request to modify the discovery and scheduling order (Doc. No. 73), is granted; 2. The discovery deadline of October 2, 2018, and the dispositive motion deadline of December 3, 2018, are vacated; and 3. The Court will order new deadlines following a ruling on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment for the failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: /s/ Barbara September 26, 2018 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?