Sears v. County of Butte, et al.,

Filing 57

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 07/18/18 DENYING 53 Motion to Compel as untimely. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL SEARS, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:15-CV-0589-MCE-CMK vs. ORDER COUNTY OF BUTTE, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 / 17 Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this civil action for 18 damages under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq., and 42 19 U.S.C. § 1981. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 53) for issuance of an order 20 to show cause regarding contempt directed to non-party Oroville Police Department for failure to 21 comply with a subpoena. A hearing was held before the undersigned in Redding, California, on 22 July 18, 2018. Grant A. Winter, Esq., appeared for plaintiff. William E. Camy, Esq., appeared 23 for defendant. Anita Bamshad, Esq., appeared for non-party Oroville Police Department. After 24 considering arguments, the matter was submitted. 25 /// 26 /// 1 1 Plaintiff’s motion is untimely. Pursuant to the District Judge’s April 2, 2018, 2 order, the original August 12, 2015, scheduling order was modified to allow for the completion 3 of non-expert discovery by June 15, 2018. See Doc. 14. While plaintiff’s counsel argued at the 4 hearing that more time is needed for discovery in order to honor the spirit of the April 2, 2018, 5 extension of the discovery deadline, no party has sought any further extensions. Under the 6 provisions of the District Judge’s original scheduling order, “. . . ‘completed’ means that all 7 discovery shall have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes 8 relative to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary, and where 9 discovery has been ordered, the order has been obeyed.” (emphasis added). Because 10 plaintiff’s motion was filed on June 15, 2018, with a hearing noticed for July 18, 2018, it is 11 untimely. 12 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 53) for 13 issuance of an order to show cause regarding contempt directed to non-party Oroville Police 14 Department is denied as untimely. 15 16 17 18 DATED: July 18, 2018 ______________________________________ CRAIG M. KELLISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?