Harris v. German et al

Filing 85

ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's 81 , 82 , Motions for Extension of Time; SIXTY-DAY (60) DEADLINE to File Motion to Compel and to Conduct Depositions, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/30/2020. (Orozco, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEVONTE HARRIS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 1:15-cv-01462-DAD-GSA-PC ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (ECF Nos. 81, 82.) vs. HUMBERTO GERMAN, et al., 15 SIXTY-DAY DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO COMPEL AND TO CONDUCT DEPOSITIONS Defendants. 16 17 18 I. BACKGROUND 19 Devonte Harris (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with 20 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case now proceeds with the First 21 Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on March 14, 2016, against defendants Correctional 22 Officer (C/O) Humberto German, C/O Philip Holguin, and C/O R. Burnitzki (collectively, 23 “Defendants”), for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and against 24 defendant C/O Philip Holguin for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment.1 (ECF No. 8.) 25 On December 2, 2019, Plaintiff filed motions for a sixty-day extension of time to file a 26 motion to compel, and a sixty-day extension of time to conduct depositions. (ECF Nos 81, 82.) 27 28 1 On January 17, 2019, the court dismissed all other claims and defendants from this case based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. (ECF No. 31.) 1 1 Defendants have not opposed the motions, and the time for opposition has passed. Local Rule 2 230(l). 3 II. PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS 4 A. 5 Plaintiff seeks a sixty-day extension of time to file a motion to compel in which he seeks 6 to compel Defendants to comply with the court’s order issued on September 24, 2019, which 7 ordered Defendants to produce discovery documents no later than October 25, 2019. (ECF No. 8 77.) Plaintiff asserts that Defendants only produced a confidential appeal query and failed to 9 produce the internal affairs report that was ordered. Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion to Compel (ECF No. 81.) 10 Plaintiff asserts that on November 5, 2019, he was transferred from California State 11 Prison-Corcoran to California State Prison-Sacramento for a criminal proceeding in Sacramento, 12 and that prison staff only allowed him to transfer with a limited amount of his legal material, 13 none of which is related to this case. For this reason, and because he has been engrossed in the 14 criminal trial in which he is representing himself, Plaintiff asserts that he has not been able to file 15 the motion to compel. 16 Defendants have not opposed Plaintiff’s motion for extension of time. Based on the 17 foregoing, the court finds good cause to grant Plaintiff an extension of time to file the motion to 18 compel he describes above. 19 B. 20 For the same reasons cited above, Plaintiff seeks a sixty-day extension of time to arrange 21 for and conduct depositions. Defendants have not opposed Plaintiff’s motion for extension of 22 time. The court finds good cause to grant Plaintiff an extension of time to arrange for and conduct 23 depositions. 24 IV. Motion for Extension of Time to Conduct Depositions (ECF No. 82.) CONCLUSION 25 Based on the foregoing and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 26 1. 27 28 Plaintiff’s motions for extension of time, filed on December 2, 2019, are GRANTED; /// 2 1 2. Plaintiff is granted sixty days from the date of service of this order in which to file 2 a motion to compel Defendants to comply with the court’s order of September 24, 3 2019; and 4 3. Plaintiff is granted sixty days from the date of service of this order in which to 5 arrange for and conduct depositions, pursuant to the court’s order of October 15, 6 2019. 7 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 30, 2020 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?