Robinson v. Davey et al

Filing 79

ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's 78 Motion to Modify Scheduling Order; ORDER EXTENDING Discovery Deadline and Deadline to File Dispositive Motions for All Parties, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 3/18/2021. New Discovery Deadline: 8/2/2021; New Dispositive Motions Deadline: 10/4/2021. 60-Day Deadline for Plaintiff to Serve Responses to Defendant Peterson's Written Discovery Requests. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANTHONY L. ROBINSON,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

vs.

1:17-cv-01524-DAD-GSA-PC
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING
ORDER
(ECF No. 78.)

DAVE DAVEY, et al.,

16

ORDER EXTENDING DISCOVERY
DEADLINE AND DEADLINE TO FILE
DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS FOR ALL
PARTIES

17

New Discovery Deadline:

18

New Dispositive Motions Deadline: October 4, 2021

15

Defendants.

August 2, 2021

19

SIXTY-DAY DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFF
TO SERVE RESPONSES TO
DEFENDANT PETERSON’S WRITTEN
DISCOVERY REQUESTS

20
21
22
23

I.

BACKGROUND

24

Anthony L. Robinson (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

25

with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case now proceeds on Plaintiff’s

26

First Amended Complaint filed on July 2, 2018, against defendant C/O H. German for use of

27

excessive force, and against defendants Sgt. A. Peterson and S. Gonzales-Thompson (LVN) for

28

providing inadequate medical care, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 24.)
1

1

On January 2, 2020, the court issued a Discovery and Scheduling Order establishing

2

pretrial deadlines for the parties, including a discovery deadline of July 2, 2020, and a dispositive

3

motions deadline of September 2, 2020. (ECF No. 61.) On April 15, 2020, the court granted

4

defendants Peterson and German’s motion to modify the Scheduling Order, extending the

5

discovery deadline to October 2, 2020, and the dispositive motions deadline to December 2, 2020,

6

for all parties to this action. (ECF No. 64.) On August 3, 2020, defendants Peterson and German

7

filed another motion to modify the Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 70.) On August 10, 2020, the

8

court granted defendants Peterson and German’s motion to modify the Scheduling Order,

9

extending the discovery deadline to April 2, 2021, and the dispositive motions deadline to June

10

2, 2021, for all parties to this action. (ECF No. 71.)

11

On February 22, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion to modify the Scheduling Order. (ECF

12

No. 78.) Defendants have not filed an opposition. The motion is now before the court. Local

13

Rule 230(l).

14

II.

MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER

15

Modification of a scheduling order requires a showing of good cause, Fed. R. Civ. P.

16

16(b), and good cause requires a showing of due diligence, Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations,

17

Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). To establish good cause, the party seeking the

18

modification of a scheduling order must generally show that even with the exercise of due

19

diligence, they cannot meet the requirement of the order. Id. The court may also consider the

20

prejudice to the party opposing the modification. Id. If the party seeking to amend the scheduling

21

order fails to show due diligence the inquiry should end and the court should not grant the motion

22

to modify. Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison, Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002).

23

Plaintiff requests the court to extend the deadlines to conduct discovery and file

24

dispositive motions by 120 days each because he is currently out to court at the Los Angeles

25

County Mens Central Jail on a criminal matter and does not have access to his legal property or

26

supplies needed to respond to discovery requests or otherwise litigate this case.

27

The court finds good cause to extend the discovery and dispositive motions deadlines in

28

the court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order. Plaintiff has shown that even with the exercise of
2

1

due diligence he cannot meet the requirements of the order. Defendants have not opposed the

2

proposed modification. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to modify the Scheduling Order, filed on

3

February 22, 2021, shall be granted. The deadline to conduct discovery shall be extended to

4

August 2, 2021, and the deadline to file dispositive motions shall be extended to October 4, 2021

5

for all parties.

6

III.

EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT PETERSON’S

7

WRITTEN DISCOVERY REQUESTS

8

Pursuant to the court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order issued on January 2, 2020, the

9

parties were informed that “[r]esponses to written discovery requests shall be due 30 calendar

10

days after the request is served.” (emphasis in original) (ECF No. 61 at 2:5.)

11

Plaintiff reports that he received written discovery requests from defendant Peterson on

12

February 11, 2020, but he is unable to respond to the discovery requests until he has access to his

13

legal property, ink pens, legal copies, legal supplies, and envelopes. Plaintiff states that he was

14

transferred out-to-court from California State Prison-Sacramento on December 6, 2019, and his

15

property is being held there until he returns. Plaintiff also alleges that the Los Angeles County

16

Mens Central Jail, where he is currently housed, does not provide him with the supplies he needs

17

to litigate this case.1

18

The court finds good cause to grant Plaintiff a 60-day extension of time to respond to

19

defendant Peterson’s discovery requests. Plaintiff’s new deadline to serve responses to the

20

discovery requests shall be 60 days from the date of service of this order. If Plaintiff requires a

21

further extension of time, he should file a motion before the expiration of the prior deadline.

22

IV.

CONCLUSION

23

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

24

1.

25

Plaintiff’s motion to modify the court’s Discovery and Scheduling Order, filed on
February 22, 2021, is GRANTED;

26
27
1

28

Plaintiff also requests CSP-SAC to send his property to him, and the Los Angeles County Mens
Central Jail to provide him with supplies needed to litigate this case. (ECF No. 78 at 4:19-26.) The court shall
address these requests by separate order.
3

1

2.

2
3

August 2, 2021 for all parties to this action;
3.

4
5

The deadline for the completion of discovery is extended from April 2, 2021 to

The deadline for filing and serving pretrial dispositive motions is extended from
June 2, 2021 to October 4, 2021, for all parties to this action;

4.

Plaintiff is granted an extension of time until 60 days from the date of service of

6

this order in which to serve responses to defendant Peterson’s written discovery

7

requests received by Plaintiff on February 11, 2021; and

8

5.

9

All other provisions of the court’s January 2, 2020 Discovery and Scheduling
Order remain the same.

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 18, 2021

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4