Garcia v. California Department of Correction & Rehabilitation, et al

Filing 49

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/10/15 ordering defendants' motion to modify the scheduling order 48 is denied without prejudice; the court will set a new dispositive motion deadline after resolution of defendants' pe nding motion for summary judgment premised on plaintiff's alleged failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the merits of his claims 45 is denied without prejudice to the re-filing of his motion following the court's resolution of defendants' exhaustion motion and the setting of a new dispositive motion deadline. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DANNY R. GARCIA,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:13-cv-1952 JAM AC P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

C/O HEATH, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17

Defendants move to extend the November 20, 2015 dispositive motion deadline in this

18

case. Defendants seek adequate time to file a dispositive motion on the merits of plaintiff’s

19

claims after the court rules on their pending motion for summary judgment premised on

20

plaintiff’s alleged failure to exhaust his administrative remedies; defendants’ exhaustion motion

21

was filed on behalf of five of the six defendants.

22

The court declines to vacate the current dispositive motion deadline at this time.

23

However, the court will set a new dispositive motion deadline after it has reached a decision on

24

defendants’ exhaustion motion. For this reason, the court will also deny without prejudice

25

plaintiff’s pending motion on the merits of his claims; plaintiff may re-file his motion after the

26

court has resolved defendants’ exhaustion motion and set a new dispositive motion deadline.

27

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

28

1. Defendants’ motion to modify the scheduling order, ECF No. 48, is denied without
1

1

prejudice; the court will set a new dispositive motion deadline after resolution of defendants’

2

pending motion for summary judgment premised on plaintiff’s alleged failure to exhaust his

3

administrative remedies; and

4

2. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the merits of his claims, ECF No. 45, is

5

denied without prejudice to the re-filing of his motion following the court’s resolution of

6

defendants’ exhaustion motion and the setting of a new dispositive motion deadline.

7

DATED: November 10, 2015

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2