Reynolds v. United States of America et al

Filing 30

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 1/10/12 APPROVING 29 Stipulation and Proposed Order; CONTINUING Final Pretrial Conference to 2/8/12/at 10:00 a.m. and Bench Trial to 4/16/12 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 24 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. (Meuleman, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 JAYME REYNOLDS, 9 Plaintiff, 10 11 No. CIV S-10-161 EFB vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 12 Defendant. ORDER / 13 This case is before the undersigned due to the consent of the parties. See 28 U.S.C. 14 15 § 636(c); E.D. Cal. L.R. 305; Dckt. No. 23. Pursuant to the Rule 16 status (pretrial scheduling) 16 order issued in this action, a final pretrial conference is currently scheduled for January 11, 2012, 17 and trial is set to commence on March 13, 2012. Dckt. No. 24. However, on January 10, 2012, 18 the parties filed a stipulation to continue the final pretrial conference “to a date mutually 19 acceptable to the court and counsel,” due to the unavailability of plaintiff’s counsel. Dckt. No. 20 29. Plaintiff’s counsel contends that he is currently in trial in state court “and will be unavailable 21 until after January 20, 2012.” Id. The court would ordinarily not be inclined to continue the final pretrial conference, 22 23 which requires a modification of the Rule 16 scheduling order and therefore a showing of good 24 cause, simply due to plaintiff’s counsel’s unavailability, especially given that plaintiff’s counsel 25 did not inform the court of his unavailability until shortly before the final pretrial conference was 26 //// 1 1 scheduled to occur.1 However, because the parties have stipulated to continue the conference, 2 and because the court needs to reschedule the current trial date due to its own availability, the 3 good cause issue will not be reached and the parties’ stipulation will be approved. 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. The parties’ stipulation to continue the January 11, 2012 final pretrial conference, 6 7 8 9 10 11 Dckt. No. 29, is approved; 2. The final pretrial conference is continued to February 8, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 24; and 3. The bench trial is continued to April 16, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 24. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: January 10, 2012. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 23 24 25 26 Plaintiff’s counsel’s staff originally contacted the undersigned’s courtroom deputy the week prior to the final pretrial conference indicating that plaintiff’s counsel would be unavailable on the date of the conference. However, the parties’ stipulation to continue the conference was not filed until the afternoon before the conference. In the future, failure to promptly notify the court of a party or counsel’s unavailability may result in the denial of a request to reschedule and/or the imposition of sanctions. Counsel is admonished that the failure to exercise due diligence in planning and managing a calendar does not amount to good cause for purposes of modifying a Rule 16 scheduling order. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?