Robinson v. Davey et al

Filing 84

ORDER GRANTING Defendants' Third 83 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 8/6/2021. Discovery due by 11/1/2021; Dispositive Motions filed by 1/3/2022.(Sant Agata, S)

Case 1:17-cv-01524-DAD-GSA Document 84 Filed 08/06/21 Page 1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

ANTHONY L. ROBINSON,

9

Plaintiff,

10
11

vs.

1:17-cv-01524-DAD-GSA-PC
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
THIRD MOTION TO MODIFY
SCHEDULING ORDER
(ECF No. 83.)

DAVE DAVEY, et al.,

13

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

14

New Discovery Deadline:

15

New Dispositive Motions Deadline: January 3, 2022

12

Defendants.

November 1, 2021

16
17

I.

BACKGROUND

18

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

19

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

20

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

21

excessive force, and against defendants Sgt. A. Peterson and S. Thomas-Beltran1 (LVN) for

22

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

23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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

27
28
1

Sued as S. Gonzales-Thompson.
1

Case 1:17-cv-01524-DAD-GSA Document 84 Filed 08/06/21 Page 2 of 3

1

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

2

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

3

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

4

2020, the court again granted

5

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

6

deadline to June 2, 2021, for all parties to this action. (ECF No. 71.) On February 22, 2021,

7

Plaintiff filed a motion to modify the Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 78.) On March 19, 2021, the

8

court granted Plaintiff’s motion to modify the Scheduling Order extending the discovery deadline

9

to August 2, 2021, and the dispositive motions deadline to October 4, 2021, for all parties to this

10

defendants Peterson and German’s motion to modify the

action. (ECF No. 79.)

11

On August 2, 2021, defendants Peterson, German, and Gonzales-Thompson

12

(“Defendants”) filed a third motion to modify the Scheduling Order. (ECF No. 83.)

13

II.

MOTION TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

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

18

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

19

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

20

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

21

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

22

Defendants request the court to extend the deadline to conduct discovery and the deadline

23

to file dispositive motions by 90 days each due to the COVID-19 crisis. Defense counsel has not

24

been able to depose Plaintiff. In addition, Defendants have not received any responses to

25

Defendants’ discovery requests or written correspondence. (Decl. of David E. Kuchinsky, ECF

26

No. 83-1 ¶ 4.) Good cause appearing, the deadline to conduct discovery shall be extended to

27

November 1, 2021, and the deadline to file dispositive motions shall be extended to January 3,

28

2022.
2

Case 1:17-cv-01524-DAD-GSA Document 84 Filed 08/06/21 Page 3 of 3

1

Defense counsel has also notified the court that on July 9, 2021, he received a copy of

2

Plaintiff’s Second Motion for Request of Extension of Time of Discovery Deadline, which for

3

an unknown reason was never filed with the court. (Id. ¶ 5 & Exh. B.) In the motion Plaintiff

4

requests a 60-day extension of time to respond to Defendants’ outstanding discovery requests, as

5

well as a 60-day extension of the discovery and dispositive motion deadlines. (Id.) Defendants

6

request that the court allow Plaintiff an additional 60 days to respond to Defendants’ outstanding

7

discovery requests. (Id. ¶10.) Good cause appearing, Plaintiff shall be granted an additional 60

8

days to respond to Defendants’ outstanding discovery requests.

9

III.

CONCLUSION

10

Based on the foregoing and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1.

12
13

2, 2021, is GRANTED;
2.

14
15

The deadline for the completion of discovery is extended from August 2, 2021
2021 to November 1, 2021, for all parties to this action;

3.

16
17

Defendants’ third motion to modify the court’s Scheduling Order, filed on August

The deadline for filing and serving pretrial dispositive motions is extended from
October 4, 2021 to January 3, 2022, for all parties to this action;

4.

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

18

this order in which to serve responses to Defendants’ outstanding discovery

19

requests; and

20

5.

21

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

22
23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 6, 2021

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26
27
28
3