Jones v. Jimenez et al

Filing 104

ORDER Denying 103 Motion for Reconsideration, signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 7/12/18. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

JEREMY JONES,
Plaintiff,

9
10

v.

11

JIMENEZ, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13
14
15
16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:14-cv-02045-DAD-SAB (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
RECONSIDER ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO MODIFY THE DISCOVERY AND
SCHEDULING ORDER
[ECF No. 103]

Plaintiff Jeremy Jones is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

17

On April 30, 2018, the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order to

18

extend the discovery cut-off date. (ECF No. 99.) Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to

19

reconsider that order. (ECF No. 103.)

20

Reconsideration motions are committed to the discretion of the trial court. Rodgers v. Watt,

21

722 F.2d 456, 460 (9th Cir. 1983) (en banc); Combs v. Nick Garin Trucking, 825 F.2d 437, 441 (D.C.

22

Cir. 1987). A party seeking reconsideration must set forth facts or law of a strongly convincing nature

23

to induce the court to reverse a prior decision.

24

Bakersfield, 634 F.Supp. 656, 665 (E.D. Cal. 1986), rev’d in part on other grounds, 828 F.2d 514 (9th

25

Cir. 1987).

See, e.g., Kern-Tulare Water Dist. v. City of

26

Plaintiff’s prior motion to extend the discovery deadline was untimely and did not show any

27

diligence and good cause for the requested extension, particularly as he had waited over six months to

28

begin initiating discovery, without any explanation. (See ECF No. 99, at 4.) In the current motion,
1

1

Plaintiff explains that he was making good-faith efforts to negotiate a settlement. This does not

2

present good cause for his lack of diligence in conducting discovery, nor does it explain why he waited

3

until after the deadline passed before seeking an extension of the discovery deadline. Although the

4

Court encourages good-faith settlement negotiations, such negotiations are not sufficient cause for

5

failing to initiate any discovery for over six months. Thus, Plaintiff has not presented sufficient

6

grounds for the Court to reconsider its prior order.
For these reasons, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration is HEREBY DENIED.

7
8
9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

July 12, 2018
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2