Lear v. Biter et al
Filing
110
ORDER GRANTING Defendant's Ex Parte Application to modify Discovery and Dispositive Motion Deadlines in Scheduling Order 108 ; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART Plaintiff's Motion 103 signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 6/24/2020. (Lundstrom, T)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
FRESNO DIVISION
11
12
RODERICK WILLIAM LEAR,
13
Plaintiff,
14
v.
15
Case No. 1:15-CV-01903-DAD-JDP
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S EX
PARTE APPLICATION TO MODIFY
DISCOVERY AND DISPOSITIVE MOTION
DEADLINES IN SCHEDULING ORDER
JOHNATHAN AKANNO, ET AL.,
16
ECF No. 108
Defendants.
17
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
18
ECF No. 103
19
20
21
On April 10, 2020, plaintiff filed a motion seeking clarification, to strike discovery, and a
22
pre-trial conference. ECF No. 103. Because plaintiff represented in his motion that defendants
23
had not responded to discovery requests or otherwise conducted discovery, the court ordered a
24
response. ECF No. 105. In response, defendants acknowledge that discovery has not been
25
completed in this case, ECF No. 107, and seek to reopen discovery according to proposed new
26
deadlines in an ex parte application, ECF No. 108. As it appears that both parties seek discovery,
27
and for good cause shown, defendants’ ex parte application is granted.
28
1
1
Plaintiff’s motion, ECF No. 103, is granted in part. Plaintiff will have the benefit of a new
2
discovery deadline and the court will clarify where plaintiff should send his discovery requests.
3
However, a pre-trial conference would be premature at this time, and thus the court declines to set
4
one at this juncture. Plaintiff’s discovery requests of defendants Akanno and Palomino may be
5
sent to their attorneys at the following address:
6
8
Susan Coleman
Martin Kosla
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
444 South Flower Street, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, California 90071-2953
9
Should the parties have any discovery-related disputes, they must attempt to resolve those
7
10
disputes among themselves before filing a motion with the court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1)
11
(requiring the parties to meet and confer regarding discovery disputes before bringing them to the
12
court). Failure to do so will result in denial of any discovery-related motion.
13
Accordingly,
14
1. Plaintiff’s motion, ECF No. 103, is granted in part and denied in part, as stated herein.
15
2. Defendants’ ex parte application, ECF No. 108, is granted.
16
3. The discovery and scheduling order, ECF No. 99, is further modified as follows:
17
a. Fact Discovery Cut-off: 9/15/20
18
b. Initial Expert Disclosures: 9/30/20
19
c. Rebuttal Expert Disclosures: 10/30/20
20
d. Expert Discovery Cut-off: 11/30/20
21
e. Dispositive Motion Deadline: 12/31/20
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
June 24, 2020
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
4
5
6
No. 204.
7
8
9
10
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?