Glass v. Gregory et al

Filing 35

ORDER GRANTING 32 Motion and AMENDING Scheduling and Planning Order, signed by Chief Judge Ralph R. Beistline on 2/2/16. (Marrujo, C)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DONALD GLASS,
Case No. 1:14-cv-01703-RRB
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION
AT DOCKET 32 and AMENDING
SCHEDULING AND PLANNING ORDER

vs.
A. GREGORY, et al.,
Defendants.

PENDING MOTION
At Docket 32 Defendants A. Gregory and S. Duran have moved for a protective
order staying discovery. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.
Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the issue
of exhaustion of administrative remedies.1 Plaintiff’s opposition to that motion is due
February 12, 2016.2 Plaintiff has served a Request for Production on Defendants.3 In their
motion Defendants seek an order staying further discovery in this matter except to the
extent that discovery relates to the narrow issue of exhaustion of administrative remedies.
Plaintiffs have indicated that they would provide timely (by January 11, 2016) responses
to the requests to the extent the requests relate to the issue of exhaustion, i.e., Requests
10 and 15.

1

Docket 25.

2

Docket 34.

3

Docket 32-3.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION AT DOCKET 32
Glass v. Gregory, 1:14-cv-01703-RRB – 1

It is the policy of this Court to determine the threshold issue of exhaustion of
administrative remedies as early in the proceedings as practicable. This policy, designed
to avoid unnecessary pre-trial preparation and proceedings, is intended to promote both
judicial efficiency and the interests of the parties. Where, as here, the exhaustion issue
is raised timely, limiting discovery to information relevant to the issue of exhaustion is
consistent with and furthers that policy.
ORDER
Accordingly, the Motion for Protective Order Staying Discovery at Docket 32 is
GRANTED.4 Other than with respect to Requests 10 and 15, Defendants’ response to
Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents to Defendants Gregory and Duran [Set No.
2] will be due not later than 45 days after the Court issues its ruling on Defendants’ Motion
for Summary Judgment.
The Court on its own volition amends the Discovery and Scheduling Order
heretofore entered by the Court5 as follows:
The first sentence of Paragraph 7 is amended to read: The deadline for completion
of all discovery, including the filing of all motions to compel discovery, is June 15, 2016.
Paragraph 8 is amended to read: The deadline for filing all dispositive motions is
August 15, 2016.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of February, 2016.
S/ RALPH R. BEISTLINE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4

In ruling on this motion the Court assumes that Defendants did in fact provide
Plaintiff with the documents requested in Requests 10 and 15.
5

Docket 15.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION AT DOCKET 32
Glass v. Gregory, 1:14-cv-01703-RRB – 2