Madden v. Hicks et al

Filing 74

ORDER GRANTING 73 Defendants' Second Motion to Modify the Discovery and Scheduling Order and Stay Discovery and Dispositive Motion Deadlines; ORDER GRANTING 73 Defendants' Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief, signed by Mag istrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 11/28/2023. Fact-based discovery (not including discovery related to the issue of exhaustion) is STAYED. The discovery and dispositive motion deadlines are VACATED. Defendants' reply in support of the pending exhaustion motion for summary judgment is due on or before 1/22/2024. (Rivera, O)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

MICHAEL MADDEN, Successor-inInterest to Ryan P. Madden, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

13
14
15

v.
HICKS, et al.,

Case No. 1:18-cv-00255-ADA-BAM (PC)
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
SECOND MOTION TO MODIFY THE
DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING ORDER
AND STAY DISCOVERY AND
DISPOSITIVE MOTION DEADLINES
(ECF No. 73)

17

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO
FILE REPLY BRIEF
(ECF No. 73)

18

Defendants’ Reply Due: January 22, 2024

16

Defendants.

19
20

Plaintiffs Michael Madden and Kathleen “Kathy” Madden (“Plaintiffs”), as Successors-in-

21

Interest to Ryan P. Madden, are proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action

22

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendant Hicks for excessive force

23

and assault and battery claims, and against Defendants Silva and Hicks for California Bane Act

24

and retaliation claims.

25

Pursuant to the Court’s May 3, 2023 discovery and scheduling order and August 2, 2023

26

order granting Defendants’ request for extension of time to serve discovery responses, the

27

deadline for completion of all discovery is January 24, 2024, and the deadline for filing all

28

dispositive motions (other than a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust) is March
1

1
2

11, 2024. (ECF Nos. 60, 65.)
On October 3, 2023, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that

3

Plaintiffs failed to exhaust their administrative remedies. (ECF No. 70.) Following an extension

4

of time, Plaintiffs’ opposition is due on or before December 6, 2023. (ECF No. 72.)

5

Currently before the Court is Defendants’ second motion to modify the discovery and

6

scheduling order, filed November 22, 2023. (ECF No. 73.) Defendants request that the Court

7

stay the fact discovery and dispositive motion deadlines, to be reset for sixty days after the Court

8

rules on the pending exhaustion-based summary judgment motion. Defendants also request that

9

their deadline to file a reply to Plaintiffs’ opposition to the summary judgment motion be

10
11

extended to January 22, 2024. (Id.)
In support of the motion, Defendants argue that because the pending summary judgment

12

motion may dispose of all of Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendants, it would be a waste of

13

resources to require the parties to continue pursuing fact discovery on issues not related to the

14

exhaustion of administrative remedies. It would also be a waste of resources to require the parties

15

to prepare another pretrial dispositive motion before the pending exhaustion motion is decided.

16

Finally, defense counsel declares that he is currently scheduled to go on leave from December 11,

17

2023 through January 7, 2024, and will not have sufficient time to review Plaintiffs’ opposition—

18

currently due on or before December 6, 2023—and prepare Defendants’ reply before going on

19

leave. Defendants therefore request an extension of time until January 22, 2024, or fourteen days

20

after defense counsel returns from leave, to file their reply. (Id.)

21
22
23

Plaintiffs have not yet had an opportunity to file a response, but the Court finds a response
is unnecessary. The motion is deemed submitted. Local Rule 230(l).
Having considered the request, the Court finds good cause to modify the discovery and

24

scheduling order to stay fact-based discovery and to vacate the discovery and dispositive motion

25

deadlines. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The Court finds it would be an efficient use of the resources

26

of the Court and the parties to address any exhaustion issues prior to reaching the merits of this

27

action. The Court further notes that a stay of fact-based discovery does not prevent the parties

28

from conducting any further discovery needed to address the issue of whether Plaintiffs exhausted
2

1

administrative remedies, particularly as the motion for summary judgment is not fully briefed.

2

Finally, the Court finds that the relief granted here will not result in prejudice to Plaintiffs.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

4

1. Defendants’ second motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order, (ECF No.

5
6

73), is GRANTED;
2. Fact-based discovery (not including discovery related to the issue of exhaustion) is

7

STAYED;

8

3. The discovery and dispositive motion deadlines are VACATED;

9

4. Defendants’ motion for extension of time to file a reply in support of the pending

10
11

exhaustion motion for summary judgment, (ECF No. 73), is GRANTED;
5. Defendants’ reply in support of the pending exhaustion motion for summary judgment

12
13

is due on or before January 22, 2024; and
6. As necessary and appropriate, the Court will reset the discovery and dispositive

14

motion deadlines following resolution of the pending motion for summary judgment

15

for failure to exhaustion administrative remedies.

16
17
18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

November 28, 2023

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3