Reynolds v. Smith et al

Filing 64

ORDER granting 63 Motion to Stay discovery and case dispositive motions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark R. Abel on 4/19/13. (sh1)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Dorothea Reynolds, : Plaintiff Defendants Judge Marbley : Robert W. Smith, et al., Civil Action 2:11-cv-00277 : v. : Magistrate Judge Abel : Scheduling Conference Order On April 19, 2013, counsel for the parties participated in a telephone conference with the Magistrate Judge to discuss case scheduling. On April 11, 2013, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity and arguing that plaintiff failed to exhaust her prison administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). Plaintiff needs to take discovery to respond to the motion. Plaintiff’s counsel will advise defendants’ counsel today of the deponents they want to depose at the Ohio Reformatory for Women. These include Marta Raneri, an Inspector of Institutional Services at the prison. Counsel hope to schedule those depositions to be taken in the next several weeks. Then counsel will consult and submit an agreed proposed scheduling order in a word processing format to me or before May 24, 2013 ( that would establish a deadline for completing discovery under Rule 56(f) related to the April 11 motion for summary judgment and a deadline for plaintiff to respond to that motion on See S.D. Ohio Civ. Rule 7.2(d) Defendants’ April 11 motion to stay the discovery and case-dispositive motions deadlines (doc. 63) is GRANTED. Counsel are DIRECTED to call my office (614.719.3370) within seven (7) days of any decision denying the April 11 motion for summary judgment (doc. 62) to schedule a telephone conference to establish deadlines for completing all merits discovery and filing case-dispositive motions. s/Mark R. Abel United States Magistrate Judge 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?