Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Knapp v. Hickman

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 22, 2008

ERIC CHARLES RODNEY KNAPP, PLAINTIFF,
v.
RODERICK HICKMAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is defendants' request to modify the scheduling order (Doc. 173).

Pursuant to the current scheduling order (Doc. 165), discovery was opened until October 31, 2008. Accordingly, all discovery in this matter is now complete and discovery is closed. In addition, all dispositive motions were to be filed within 60 days of the close of discovery, or by December 30, 2008. On December 17, 2008, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. This motion is not dispositive as the defendants are not alleging plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies on all of his claims. However, the defendants were granted leave to file a separate motion to dismiss for non- exhaustion of administrative remedies by the dispositive motion deadline (Doc. 104). Therefore, defendants' motion is timely.

Given the number of defendants and the number of claims involved in this case, the court finds it appropriate to resolve the motion to dismiss prior to any other dispositive motions. Accordingly, the court will grant defendants' request. However, the parties have had ample time to conduct all necessary discovery. The court will not entertain a motion to reopen discovery prior to the new dispositive motion deadline, regardless of the result of the motion to dismiss. In addition, the court will set a short deadline for filing any other dispositive motions following a ruling on the motion to dismiss.

Accordingly, good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' request to modify the scheduling order is granted;

2. Discovery remains closed; and

3. All dispositive motions shall be filed within 30 days after the court's final ruling on the defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. 175).

20081222

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.