UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 11, 2011
KEVIN E. FIELDS,
MAURICE JUNIOUS, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR COPY OF DOCKET REPORT (DOC. 23) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF DISCOVERY AND SCHEDULING ORDER IN PART (DOCS. 29, 35, 36)
Deadline To Amend Pleadings: August 8, 2011/ Discovery Cut-Off Date: September 9, 2011
Plaintiff Kevin E. Fields ("Plaintiff") is a California state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendants L. Cruz, R. Davis, K. Foley, D. B. Hernandez, Jennifer Jones, Maurice Junious, Dan Leon, R. Magvas, S. Marsh, L. Molina, and J. Tucker.
On December 6, 2010, Plaintiff filed a motion for a courtesy copy of the case docket. This motion is denied. The Court does not provide free copies of any filings. See First Informational Order ¶ 3, Doc. 2.
On May 3, 2011, June 20, 2011, and July 7, 2011, Plaintiff filed motions seeking to modify the discovery and scheduling order of November 8, 2010. Defendants have not responded to Plaintiff's motions.
In his May 3, 2011 motion, Plaintiff contends that he needs discovery to amend his pleadings as to certain unnamed Doe Defendants. Plaintiff requests a modification of the deadline to amend pleadings.
In his June 20, 2011 motion, Plaintiff contends that he is housed at Corcoran State Prison, which limits the number of pages a prisoner has access to per week to twenty sheets. Because there are eleven Defendants in this action, Plaintiff requires additional sheets to propound discovery. Plaintiff requests a modification of the discovery cut-off date to October 8, 2011.
In his July 7, 2011 motion, Plaintiff requests an extension of time to file his motion to compel. Plaintiff is currently housed in the segregated housing unit at Corcoran State Prison, and does not have access to some of his legal property pertaining to this action.
The decision to modify a scheduling order is within the broad discretion of the district court. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting Miller v. Safeco Title Ins. Co., 758 F.2d 364, 369 (9th Cir. 1985)). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16, a pretrial scheduling order "shall not be modified except upon a showing of good cause," and leave of court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4); Zivkovic v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087-88 (9th Cir. 2002). Although "the existence or degree of prejudice to the party opposing the modification might supply additional reasons to deny a motion, the focus of the inquiry is upon the moving party's reasons for seeking modification." Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609.
Good cause is also presented for modification of the deadline to amend pleadings. Good cause is presented for modification of the discovery cut-off date. The Court will set a deadline to amend pleadings of August 8, 2011 and a discovery cut-off date of September 9, 2011.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motions for modification of the discovery and scheduling order are granted in part. The deadline to amend pleadings is August 8, 2011. The discovery cut-off date, including the filing of any motions to compel, is September 9, 2011.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.