IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 7, 2011
LAURA B. DANIELS, PLAINTIFF,
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION, AND DOES 1-50,INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
This matter was on for a status (pretrial scheduling) conference before the undersigned on April 7, 2011, following the withdrawal of plaintiff's counsel and the resulting referral of this matter to the undersigned by the assigned district judge.*fn1 (See Memo. & Order, Feb. 7, 2011, at 3, Dkt. No. 11; Minute Order, Feb. 11, 2011, Dkt. No. 14.) Although defendant filed a status report in advance of the scheduling conference (Dkt. No. 15), plaintiff failed to file such a report. Plaintiff, who is now proceeding without counsel, appeared on her own behalf at the scheduling conference. Deputy Attorney General Julie L. Harlan appeared on defendant's behalf.
At the scheduling conference, plaintiff represented that she is still in the process of trying to retain new counsel and requested that she be given 90 days to continue her efforts. The undersigned indicated at the scheduling conference that the court would grant plaintiff approximately 60 additional days in which to retain counsel and respond to outstanding discovery requests, refrain from setting new dates in this case at this time, and conduct a follow on status (pretrial scheduling) conference in this case on June 9, 2011. If plaintiff is unable to retain counsel by the June 9, 2011 scheduling conference, the undersigned will schedule dates in this case assuming that plaintiff is proceeding without counsel.*fn2
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. A further status (pretrial scheduling) conference shall be held before the undersigned on Thursday, June 9, 2011, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 25. The parties shall file a joint status report or separate status reports no later than seven days prior to the rescheduled status (pretrial scheduling) conference.
2. On or before June 8, 2011, plaintiff shall respond to all outstanding discovery requests propounded by defendant. Although plaintiff has been given an opportunity to respond to the outstanding discovery requests, defendant shall retain the right to argue that plaintiff waived her objections to any or all discovery requests by failing to timely object.
IT IS SO ORDERED.