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.

MANUEL ARENAS v. ENANMOH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


November 29, 2010

MANUEL ARENAS,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
ENANMOH, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DENYING MOTION (Doc. 38, 39)

Plaintiff Manuel Arenas ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 22, 2010, Defendant filed a motion requesting a modification of the scheduling order. (Doc. #38.) Defendant seeks an extension of the deadline to file dispositive motions. Defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings and a motion to extend the deadline to file dispositive motions.

The Court's August 28, 2009 discovery and scheduling order set the deadline for filing dispositive motions at July 7, 2010. (Doc. #17.) Defendant did not file a dispositive motion and did not notify the Court of any intention to file a dispositive motion until the November 22, 2010 motion. Defendant's request to extend the dispositive motion deadline comes more than four months after the original deadline had passed.

Defendant argues that an extension of the dispositive motion deadline is proper because Defendant's current counsel was assigned to work on this case on October 6, 2010 -- three months after the dispositive motion deadline expired. However, the retention of new counsel does not justify a modification of the scheduling order. Defendant's new counsel has inherited this case "as is." At the time Defendant's counsel was assigned to this case, the dispositive motion deadline had long expired and a substitution of counsel does not change that fact. Defendant's new counsel has failed to raise any other facts or arguments that would justify an extension of the dispositive motion deadline.

This action is scheduled for trial on March 1, 2011.*fn1 Defendant has not raised any argument to justify a modification of the current scheduling order.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's motion requesting a modification of the scheduling order is DENIED. Defendant's November 22, 2010 motion for judgment on the pleadings is DISREGARDED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Oberto ie14hj

/s/


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.