Cida v. Lee et al

Filing 48

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/18/18 GRANTING 47 Defendants' motion. The discovery and dispositive motions deadlines set in the 9/08/17 scheduling order 43 are VACATED. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ADRIAN CIDA, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:13-cv-2289 MCE KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER BONNIE LEE, M.D., et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On January 16, 2018, defendants filed a 18 motion to modify the scheduling order to extend the deadline for discovery and dispositive 19 motions, due to the pendency of defendants’ motion for summary judgment alleging plaintiff 20 failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Defendants request extension of the discovery 21 deadline nunc pro tunc because the discovery deadline expired on December 29, 2017. 22 “The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation.” 23 Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal 24 quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that “[a] schedule may be modified only for good 25 cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). “The schedule may be modified 26 ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” 27 Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting 28 Johnson, 975 F.2d at 607). 1 1 Defendants have demonstrated good cause and diligence to extend the discovery and 2 dispositive motions deadlines. Defendants’ motion is granted. If defendants’ motion for 3 summary judgment on the issue of exhaustion is denied, the court will issue a revised scheduling 4 order to provide new deadlines for discovery and dispositive motions on the merits. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. Defendants’ motion (ECF No. 47) is granted; 7 2. The discovery and dispositive motions deadlines set in the September 8, 2017 8 9 scheduling order (ECF No. 43) are vacated; and 3. The court will issue a revised scheduling order, if appropriate, following resolution of 10 the pending motion for summary judgment. 11 Dated: January 18, 2018 12 13 14 /cw/cida2289.16b 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?