Passer v. Steevers et al

Filing 111

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/24/14 ORDERING that the October 2, 2014 hearing is vacated; Plaintiffs motion 108 is granted; and the scheduling deadlines are extended, nunc pro tunc where appropriate, as follows: Defendant Discovery Cut-Off September 16, 201; Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off September 30, 2014; Expert Disclosure Date August 31, 2014; Expert Depositions September 30, 2014; Last Hearing Date for Motions: October 10, 2014.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

ANTHONY VINCENT PASSER,

11
12
13
14

No. 2:08-cv-2792 MCE KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER AND REVISED SCHEDULING
ORDER

DR. STEEVERS, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel. On August 31, 2014, plaintiff

17

filed a motion to extend discovery and noticed the motion for hearing on October 2, 2014. Local

18

Rule 230(c) requires that opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be in writing and

19

filed and served not less than fourteen days preceding the hearing date. That deadline has now

20

passed, and defendants have not opposed the motion or otherwise responded. In any event, the

21

court has determined that the matter shall be submitted upon the record; therefore, the date for

22

hearing of this matter shall be vacated. Local Rule 230(g).

23

“The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation.”

24

Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal

25

quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for good

26

cause and with the judge's consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified ‘if

27

it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Zivkovic

28

v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson, 975
1

1
2
3

F.2d at 607).
Upon review of the motion, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that:

4

1. The October 2, 2014 hearing is vacated;

5

2. Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 108) is granted; and

6

3. The scheduling deadlines are extended, nunc pro tunc where appropriate, as follows:

7

a. Defendant Discovery Cut-Off

September 16, 2014

8

b. Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off

September 30, 2014

9

c. Expert Disclosure Date

August 31, 2014

10

d. Expert Depositions

September 30, 2014

11

e. Last Hearing Date for Motions:

October 10, 2014

12

Dated: September 24, 2014

13
14
15

/pass2792.41r

.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2