Wolinski v. Lewis et al

Filing 103

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 05/31/2024 GRANTING-IN-PART and DENYING-IN-PART the 102 Motion for Extension of Time. The motion is GRANTED to the extent that plaintiff Wolinksi's deadline to serve responses to Defendant� 39;s written discovery request is EXTENDED to 6/30/2024 and the deadline to file a motion to compel is EXTENDED to 7/30/2024. The motion is DENIED to the extent that defendants request for an extension of time to respond to plaintiff's motion for an ADA computer. This denial is without prejudice. If the court deems a response necessary, it will set a separate briefing schedule on plaintiff's motions. The dispositive motions deadline remains 8/29/2024. (Spichka, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KRZYSZTOF F. WOLINSKI,

12

No. 2:17-cv-00583 MCE AC

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

J. LEWIS, et al.,

15

ORDER

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights

18

action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Following a modification of the December 12, 2023

19

Discovery and Scheduling Order, the deadline for filing a motion to compel was extended to May

20

30, 2024. Instead of filing a motion to compel, defendants filed a second motion for an extension

21

of time to respond to plaintiff’s pending motions for access to an ADA computer. ECF No. 102.

22

The motion indicates that the parties have agreed to extend plaintiff’s deadline to respond to

23

defendants’ discovery requests that were served on February 15, 2024 despite the lack of any

24

response from plaintiff. ECF No. 102. Moreover, the parties additionally have agreed to extend

25

the motion to compel deadline to July 30, 2024. The court will grant these stipulated extensions

26

of time.

27
28

This case was originally removed from state court more than 7 years ago and has not even
finished discovery. This case is proceeding on plaintiff’s second amended complaint alleging
1

1

First Amendment retaliation and Eighth Amendment excessive force/failure to protect claims

2

against defendants. Based on this history, the court does not find good cause for defendants’

3

extension of time to respond to plaintiff’s motions concerning his access to an ADA computer

4

which are not focused on the merits of the pending claims.

5

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

6

1. Defendants’ motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 102) is granted in part and

7
8

denied in part.
2. The motion is granted to the extent that plaintiff Wolinski’s deadline to serve responses

9

to Defendants’ written discovery request is extended to June 30, 2024 and the deadline to a file a

10

motion to compel is extended to July 30, 2024. No further extensions of these deadlines shall

11

be granted.

12

3. The motion is denied to the extent that defendants request an extension of time to

13

respond to plaintiff’s motions for an ADA computer. This denial is without prejudice. If the

14

court deems a response necessary, it will set a separate briefing schedule on plaintiff’s motions.

15
16

4. The dispositive motions deadline remains August 29, 2024.
DATED: May 31, 2024

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2