Estrada v. Macias et al

Filing 80

ORDER denying 77 Motion for issuance of new discovery schedule as premature and unnecessary signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 3/3/2017. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DAVID ESTRADA,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
TERESA MACIS, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
ISSUANCE OF NEW DISCOVERY SCHEDULE
AS PREMATURE AND UNNECESSARY
[ECF No. 77]

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On March 2, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting that the Court issue a new updated

19
20

Case No.: 1:15-cv-01292-AWI-SAB (PC)

Plaintiff David Estrada is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

discovery schedule.
On September 13, 2016, the Court granted Defendants’ request for a protective order and

21
22

stayed all merits-based discovery pending resolution of the motion for summary judgment for failure

23

to exhaust the administrative remedies.
On February 9, 2017, the undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations recommending

24
25

that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted as to all Defendants, except Defendant

26

Evangene Garnett.

27

///

28

///
1

As Plaintiff was advised in the Court’s September 13, 2016, order, the Court will issue an

1
2

amended discovery scheduling order after final resolution of Defendants’ motion for summary

3

judgment. As the Findings and Recommendations have yet to be resolved, Plaintiff’s present request

4

for an amended discovery order is premature and unnecessary and is denied on such basis.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

Dated:

8

March 3, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2