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.

William Barker v. Susan L. Hubbard

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


April 29, 2011

WILLIAM BARKER PLAINTIFF,
v.
SUSAN L. HUBBARD, 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 with counsel and in forma pauperis, with claims alleged under the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131, et seq., and under state law. This case come before the court on motion by plaintiff to vacate the scheduling order entered December 20, 2010.

Plaintiff seeks an extension of time in which to conduct discovery. Good cause appearing, that extension will be granted, but not to the extent requested. The time for non-expert related discovery shall be extended by 120 days. Subsequent time will be allowed for designation of experts, rebuttal experts, and expert-related discovery.*fn1 Plaintiff also will have one month in which to submit an amended complaint, if he so chooses.*fn2

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the scheduling order in this case is amended as follows:

1. Non-expert related discovery will conclude no later than August 26, 2011.

2. All parties will designate experts no later than September 25, 2011.

3. All parties will designate rebuttal experts no later than October 25, 2011.

4. Expert related discovery will conclude no later than November 24, 2011.

5. All pre-trial motions will be filed no later than January 23, 2012.

6. If plaintiff chooses to file a second amended complaint, it is due no later than May 30, 2011.

7. The Clerk of Court is directed to send counsel forms for the parties to consent or decline the magistrate judge's jurisdiction for all purposes. The parties will return those forms, completed, no later than May 20, 2011.

8. Plaintiff's motion to vacate the scheduling order (Docket No. 65) is denied as moot.

bark1160.oah


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.