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.

John Allen v. J. Lopez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 24, 2012

JOHN ALLEN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
J. LOPEZ, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF SCHEDULING ORDER (DOC. 41) Dispositive Motion Deadline: May 4, 2012

Plaintiff John Allen ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendant M. Hicks for violation of the First Amendment, and against Defendant J. Lopez for violation of the First and Eighth Amendment. Pending before the Court is Defendants' motion to modify the scheduling order, filed March 12, 2012. The matter is submitted pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).

Defendants' counsel contends that because of attrition at the Attorney General's Office,, counsel will not be able to prepare a dispositive motion by the original deadline of March 15, 2012. Blonien Decl. ¶ 3, Doc. 41.

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.

The Court finds good cause to modify the schedule. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to modify the scheduling order, filed March 12, 2012, is granted. The deadline to file dispositive motions in this action is on or before May 4, 2012.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120424

© 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.