Rodas v. Creditors Specialty Service, Inc.

Filing 34

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/26/12 DENYING AS UNTIMELY 32 Amended Motion to Compel. The Motion is DROPPED from the court's 7/6/12 law and motion calendar. (Meuleman, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

VICTOR RODAS,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

No. CIV S-11-0209 JAM DAD

v.
CREDITORS SPECIALTY SERVICE,
INC., and CHARLES STANLEY,

ORDER

14
15

Defendants.

16

/

17

Plaintiff has filed an amended motion to compel discovery responses and

18

depositions, noticing that motion for hearing before the undersigned on July 6, 2012. (Doc. No.

19

32.) However, under the Status (Pre-trial Scheduling) Order in this case, issued on June 10, 2011

20

by the assigned District Judge, all discovery was to be completed by April 2, 2012. (Doc. No.

21

12.) On March 28, 2012, the assigned District Judge issued an order amending the June 10, 2011

22

Status (Pre-trial Scheduling) Order pursuant to the parties stipulation, and resetting the deadline

23

for the completion of discovery for June 22, 2012. (Doc. No. 29.) Pursuant to the Status (Pre-

24

trial Scheduling) Order issued by the assigned District Judge, “completed” means that

25
26

all discovery shall have been conducted so that all depositions have
been taken and any disputes relative to discovery shall have been
/////
1

1

resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has
been ordered, the order has been complied with.

2
3

(Doc. No. 12 at 3.) Id. There have been no further modifications made to the scheduling order

4

nor has the assigned District Judge extended that date for the completion of discovery past the

5

June 22, 2012 date. Therefore, plaintiff is advised that the date by which all discovery was to be

6

completed in this civil action has passed, his discovery motion is untimely and the relief he

7

requests cannot be granted.

8
9

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s June 4, 2012 amended
motion to compel (Doc. No. 32) is denied as untimely, and the motion is dropped from the

10

court’s July 6, 2012 law and motion calendar.

11

DATED: June 26, 2012.

12
13
14
15
16
17

DAD:6
Ddad1\orders.civil\rodas0209.ord.mtcden

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2