IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 24, 2011
ROBERT E. STEPHENSON, PLAINTIFF,
M. MARTEL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, proceeds with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
On December 27, 2010, plaintiff filed a request (Doc. 20) to have another person join a meet and confer regarding discovery with defendants. As the meet and confer has already occurred and the discovery dispute was resolved, this request is denied as moot.
On January 20, 2011, plaintiff requested six blank subpoenas for the District Attorney's Office and County Sheriff but did not state specifically what documents he would be requesting, therefore the request is denied.
Also on December 27, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion to modify the scheduling order (Doc. 19) to seek more time for discovery. The original scheduling order filed on August 13, 2010, allowed the parties to conduct discovery and file any motions to compel by December 3, 2010. That deadline was extended to January 10, 2011, after defendants requested an extension. Plaintiff seeks to extend the deadline to March 28, 2011. However, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate why an extension is required as he had five months to conduct discovery including the one month extension granted at defendants request. Plaintiff just generally states he seeks more discovery and may need to file a motion to compel, but provides no specific details. Plaintiff has failed to show good cause to extend discovery, therefore, the motion is denied.
On February 17, 2011, defendants filed a motion to modify the scheduling order (Doc. 30) seeking to extend the deadline to file pretrial motions from February 25, 2011 to April 1, 2011. As defendants have demonstrated good cause in their motion, it is granted.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ordered that:
1. Plaintiff's December 27, 2010, motion for a meet and confer (Doc. 20) is denied as moot;
2. Plaintiff's request for six subpoenas (Doc. 27) is denied;
3. Plaintiff's December 27, 2010, motion to modify the scheduling order (Doc.19) is denied;
4. Defendants' motion to modify the scheduling order (Doc. 30) is granted and pretrial motions must be filed no later than April 1, 2011.
GGH: AB step0238.ord
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.