Vaught v. Miranda et al

Filing 42

ORDER granting 41 request for clarification signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/19/11. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ELBERT LEE VAUGHT, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-10-1108 DAD P vs. B. MIRANDA, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 ORDER / 16 On September 2, 2011, counsel for defendants filed a request seeking clarification 17 of the court’s April 7, 2011 discovery and scheduling order. Specifically, defendants seek 18 clarification of the court’s order that requires “[a]ll pre-trial motions, except for motions to 19 compel discovery, shall be filed on or before September 30, 2011.” (Order (Doc. No. 29), ¶ 7 at 20 6.) Defendants note that they have already filed a cross-motion for summary judgment, and ask 21 if “pre-trial motions” referred to in the scheduling order includes motions in limine. 22 The court’s discovery and scheduling order does not set a deadline for the filing 23 of motions in limine. A deadline for the filing of motions in limine, if necessary, will be set in 24 this court’s pretrial order. Defendants’ cross-motion is a dispositive motion and was timely filed. 25 ///// 26 ///// 1 1 Accordingly, defendants’ September 2, 2011 request for clarification (Doc. No. 2 41) is granted. 3 DATED: September 19, 2011. 4 5 6 7 DAD:4 vaug1108.clar 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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?