Briones v. Frauenhein et al

Filing 24

ORDER granting 23 Motion to modify Discovery and Scheduling Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 5/24/2016. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHNNY G. BRIONES,

12
13
14
15

Plaintiff,
v.
FLORES, et al.,

Case No. 1:14-cv-01479-DLB PC
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO MODIFY DISCOVERY AND
SCHEUDLING ORDER
(Document 23)

Defendants.

16
17
18

Plaintiff Johnny G. Briones (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis in this civil rights action.

19

The Court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order on February 23, 2016. Pursuant to the

20

order, motions based on exhaustion were due May 23, 2016, the discovery cut-off is June 22, 2016,

21

and the dispositive motion cut-off is September 20, 2016.

22
23
24

On May 20, 2016, Defendants filed a motion to modify the Discovery and Scheduling Order.
The Court deems the matter suitable for decision without further briefing. Local Rule 230(l).
DISCUSSION

25

Modification of the pretrial scheduling order requires a showing of good cause. Fed. R. Civ.

26

P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of

27

the party seeking the extension.’” Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087

28

(9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992)).
1

1

“Although the existence or degree of prejudice to the party opposing the modification might supply

2

additional reasons to deny a motion, the focus of the inquiry is upon the moving party’s reasons for

3

seeking the modification.” Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609. “If the party seeking the modification ‘was

4

not diligent, the inquiry should end’ and the motion to modify should not be granted.” Zivkovic, 302

5

F.3d at 1087 (quoting Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609).

6

Here, Defendants request an extension of the deadline to file motions based on exhaustion, as

7

well as an extension of the discovery and dispositive motion deadlines. Counsel states that despite

8

her diligence, she needs additional time to interview witnesses and complete a motion raising a

9

failure to exhaust. Choi Decl. ¶ 4.

10

For good cause, the motion is GRANTED. Exhaustion-based motions are due by June 23,

11

2016. Discovery shall be completed sixty (60) days after a ruling on the motion, and dispositive

12

motions will be due one hundred-twenty (120) days after a ruling on the motion.

13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 24, 2016

/s/ Sandra M. Snyder
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2