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.

Thomas J. Heilman v. T. Lyons

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


February 7, 2012

THOMAS J. HEILMAN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
T. LYONS, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

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

ORDER AND REVISED SCHEDULING ORDER

On October 5, 2011, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the order filed September 21, 2011, denying plaintiff's request to compel nonparty CDCR to provide plaintiff the identities, CDC numbers, and room numbers of inmate witnesses housed with plaintiff on the ad seg wing on July 1 to 4, 2007. (Dkt. No. 71 at 2.) In his request, plaintiff asks that his request for reconsideration be "held in abeyance" until the pending motions for summary judgment are resolved.

Rather than hold plaintiff's request in abeyance, the court denies plaintiff's motion for reconsideration without prejudice to its renewal should defendants' claims against defendants Echevarria, Lyons and Esberto survive summary judgment. If these defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied, plaintiff has fourteen days thereafter in which to renew his motion for reconsideration. If summary judgment is granted, plaintiff's request is moot.

Defendant Sheldon has filed an answer. On December 22, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion to propound discovery to defendant Sheldon. Defendant Sheldon did not file an opposition. Good cause appearing, plaintiff's motion is granted. The court will set a revised scheduling order as to defendant Sheldon. The provisions of this court's October 28, 2010 discovery and scheduling order remain in effect (dkt. no. 17), except that the deadlines for discovery and dispositive motions, as to plaintiff and defendant Sheldon, are revised. Given that this case was filed in 2009, the parties are encouraged to undertake discovery forthwith. The court is not inclined to extend these deadlines.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's October 5, 2011 motion for reconsideration is denied without prejudice to its renewal fourteen days from any order by the district court denying the motion for summary judgment motion filed by defendants Echevarria, Lyons and Esberto.

2. Plaintiff's December 22, 2011 motion (dkt. no. 78) is granted. 3. Plaintiff and defendant Sheldon may conduct discovery until June 8, 2012. Any motions necessary to compel discovery shall be filed by that date. All requests for discovery pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 31, 33, 34 or 36 shall be served not later than sixty days prior to that date.

4. All pretrial motions, except motions to compel discovery, shall be filed on or before August 8, 2012. Motions shall be briefed in accordance with paragraph 8 of this court's order filed May 20, 2010.

5. Pretrial conference and trial dates will be set, as appropriate, following adjudication of any dispositive motion, or the expiration of time for filing such a motion.

20120207

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



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.