Barker v. Hubbard et al

Filing 73

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 04/29/11 ordering that the scheduling order in this case is amended as follows: Non-expert discovery will conclude no later than 08/26/11. All parties will designate experts no later than 09/25/1 1. All parties will designate rebuttal experts no later than 10/25/11. Expert related discovery will conclude no later than 11/24/11. All pretrial motions will be filed no later than 01/23/12. If plaintiff chooses to file a second amended complai nt, it is due no later than 05/30/11. The clerk of the court is directed to send counsel forms for the parties to consent or decline the magistrate judge's jurisdiction for all purposes. The parties will return the forms, completed, no later than 05/20/11. Plaintiff's motion to vacate the scheduling order 65 is denied as moot. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

WILLIAM BARKER

11
12
13

Plaintiff,

No. 2:08-cv-1160 WBS KJN (TEMP) P

vs.
SUSAN L. HUBBARD, et al.

14

Defendants.

ORDER
/

15
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding with counsel and in forma pauperis, with
16
claims alleged under the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131, et seq.,
17
and under state law. This case come before the court on motion by plaintiff to vacate the
18
scheduling order entered December 20, 2010.
19
Plaintiff seeks an extension of time in which to conduct discovery. Good cause
20
appearing, that extension will be granted, but not to the extent requested. The time for non21
expert related discovery shall be extended by 120 days. Subsequent time will be allowed for
22

designation of experts, rebuttal experts, and expert-related discovery.1 Plaintiff also will have

23
24
25
1

26

Plaintiff’s court-appointed counsel is reminded to submit a statement of costs for
experts for court approval before formally committing plaintiff to the retention of any experts.
1

1

one month in which to submit an amended complaint, if he so chooses.2

2
3

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the scheduling order in this case is amended
as follows:

4

1. Non-expert related discovery will conclude no later than August 26, 2011.

5

2. All parties will designate experts no later than September 25, 2011.

6

3. All parties will designate rebuttal experts no later than October 25, 2011.

7

4. Expert related discovery will conclude no later than November 24, 2011.

8

5. All pre-trial motions will be filed no later than January 23, 2012.

9

6. If plaintiff chooses to file a second amended complaint, it is due no later than

10

May 30, 2011.

11

7. The Clerk of Court is directed to send counsel forms for the parties to consent

12

or decline the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction for all purposes. The parties will return those

13

forms, completed, no later than May 20, 2011.

14

8. Plaintiff’s motion to vacate the scheduling order (Docket No. 65) is denied as

15

moot.

16

DATED: April 29, 2011

17
18

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20

bark1160.oah

21
22
23
24
25
26

2

The parties are encouraged to cooperate toward the goal of filing a second amended
complaint by stipulation, such that defendants’ answer to the first amended complaint can also be
stipulated as the defendants’ effective response to the second amended complaint.
2