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.

Kilgore v. Mandeville

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


March 1, 2010

IVAN KILGORE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
RICHARD MANDEVILLE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was reassigned to the undersigned on February 9, 2010. (Dkt. No. 62.)*fn1

Plaintiff is proceeding on an amended complaint against defendants Bal, Borges, Dunne, Forshay, Hampton, Kelly, Wedell, and Winton, based on claims of deliberate indifference to medical needs.

Several matters are currently pending before the court, including plaintiff's motion for discovery (Dkt. No. 49 (731 pages)), filed six days prior to the August 31, 2009 discovery deadline (see Dkt. No. 44 (Scheduling Order)). Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 63). Quickly upcoming are the deadlines for filing pretrial statements and holding a pretrial conference (see Dkt. No. 44 (pretrial statements due March 19, 2010; pretrial conference scheduled March 26, 2010; trial scheduled June 22, 2010)).

Plaintiff now seeks, inter alia, a stay of these proceedings to obtain the court's resolution of plaintiff's pending discovery motion and to permit adequate time to complete discovery before responding to defendants' motion for summary judgment and proceeding to trial. (See Dkt. No. 66.) Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause to amend the scheduling order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion for stay (Dkt. No. 66), construed as a motion to amend the scheduling order (Dkt. No. 44), is granted.

2. Plaintiff's near-identical motions for sanctions relative to defendants' failure timely to oppose plaintiff's discovery motion (Dkt. Nos. 56 and 67)*fn2 are denied without prejudice.

3. The dates currently scheduled for trial, filing pretrial statements, and convening a pretrial conference (see Dkt. No. 44) are vacated pending further order of this court. Should this matter proceed to trial, the court will, by subsequent order, set a trial date and deadline for filing pretrial statements.

4. The discovery deadline of August 31, 2009 shall remain in place pending this court's consideration of plaintiff's discovery motion and whether the deadline should be extended to allow for further appropriate discovery.

5. The December 4, 2009 deadline for filing dispositive motions (extended several times at defendants' requests)*fn3 shall also remain in place pending further order of this court.

SO ORDERED.


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.