White v. Smyers et al
Filing
87
ORDER granting 82 Motion for Reconsideration signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/26/15: This case is referred to the magistrate judge for consideration of the merits of Plaintiff's request. (Kaminski, H)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
WALTER HOWARD WHITE,
No. 2:12-cv-02868-MCE-AC-P
Plaintiff,
12
13
v.
14
SMYERS, et al.,
15
ORDER
Defendants.
16
17
On December 16, 2014, the magistrate judge issued an order denying as moot
18
Plaintiff Walter Howard White’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for a sixty-day extension of discovery
19
deadlines. See ECF No. 78. Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration,
20
ECF No. 82. For the following reasons, the Motion is GRANTED.
21
Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge’s orders shall be upheld
22
unless “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” Id. On October 6, 2014, Plaintiff requested
23
an extension of discovery deadlines. ECF No. 65. The magistrate judge granted the
24
request on October 14, 2014, and the discovery period was extended by sixty (60) days.
25
ECF No. 68 at 7. Consequently, the parties had until December 2, 2014, to serve any
26
requests for discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 31, 33, 34, or 36, and until February 2,
27
2015, to serve discovery responses. On December 5, 2014, Plaintiff requested a
28
second sixty-day extension of discovery deadlines. ECF No. 77. On December 17,
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2014, the magistrate judge denied the request as moot on the grounds that the Court
had previously allowed the parties to “conduct discovery until February 2, 2015.” ECF
No. 78 at 1. However, a review of Plaintiff’s second request clearly demonstrates that he
was requesting an extension of the deadline to propound additional discovery requests
beyond the December 2, 2014, deadline. ECF No. 77 at 26-27.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request was not moot and his Motion for Reconsideration,
ECF No. 82, is GRANTED. This case is referred to the magistrate judge for
consideration of the merits of Plaintiff’s request.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 26, 2015
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?