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.

Tony Roberts v. Matthew Cate

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


March 4, 2011

TONY ROBERTS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MATTHEW CATE, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

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

ORDER AND REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel with a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious mental health needs. On December 15, 2010, the court issued a scheduling order setting the discovery deadline for April 8, 2011, with the caveat that all requests for discovery shall be served not later than sixty days prior to that deadline. (Dkt. No. 36 at 5-6.) On January 31, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion to modify the scheduling order based on his inability to obtain copies of his mental health records. (Dkt. No. 41.) Plaintiff claims that he has reviewed his medical records and found that certain medical records concerning mental health treatment are missing. (Dkt. No. 41 at 2.) Plaintiff contends these documents are critical to his case, and he requires an extension of the discovery deadline so he can propound discovery requests based on the missing mental health records. Plaintiff filed an inmate health care appeal concerning these missing documents, and a response was due on or about February 25, 2011. (Dkt. No. 41 at 14.)

Defendants have not filed an opposition or other response to plaintiff's motion to modify the scheduling order.

Under the circumstances, it appears the discovery deadline must be continued. Plaintiff is cautioned, however, that he must be diligent in pursuing these mental health records.*fn1

If plaintiff is unable to obtain access to these records by way of prison procedures, he should seek court intervention as soon as possible to avoid further delay of this case.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's January 31, 2011 motion (dkt. no. 41) is partially granted;

2. The December 15, 2010 scheduling order is revised as follows:

A. The April 8, 2011 discovery deadline is extended to June 8, 2011; and

B. The July 1, 2011 pretrial motions deadline is extended to September 1, 2011.

In all other respects, the scheduling order remains in effect.

robe2624.so2


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.