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.

Joshua J. Cantu v. M. Garcia

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 12, 2012

JOSHUA J. CANTU,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
M. GARCIA, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL Docs. 49, 50 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS TO MODIFY SCHEDULING ORDER Doc. 51, 52 REVISED DEADLINE TO AMEND PLEADINGS: NOVEMBER 13, 2012 REVISED DISCOVERY DEADLINE: JANUARY 14, 2013 REVISED DISPOSITIVE MOTION DEADLINE: MARCH 14, 2013

On January 15, 2009, Plaintiff Joshua J. Cantu ("Plaintiff"), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 1. On July 26, 2010, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Doc. 12. On November 29, 2010, the Court found a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim for excessive force against M. Garcia and failure to intervene excessive force against three doe defendants. Doc. 14. On January 3, 2012, the Court issued a discovery and scheduling order, setting a deadline to amend pleadings of July 3, 2012, a discovery deadline of September 3, 2012, and a dispositive motion deadline of November 13, 2012. Doc. 25.

On March 23, 2012, Defendant Garcia filed a motion for a twenty-one (21) day extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's discovery requests from February 9, 2012. Doc. 47. In Defendant's motion, counsel stated that she had been very ill. Id. On April 10, 2012, the Court granted Defendant's motion for extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's discovery requests. Doc. 48.

On May 11, 2012 and May 14, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel, stating Defendant had not responded to his discovery requests from February 9, 2012. Docs. 49, 50. In Plaintiff's motions, he does not reference the Court's order granting an extension of time, so it is unclear whether Plaintiff filed his motions after waiting for Defendant's extended time to respond. Id.

On July 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to extend time to amend pleadings regarding the Doe Defendants. Doc. 51. In Plaintiff's motion, he states that he has not received a response to his first set of interrogatories and requests for production of documents. Id. Plaintiff states that he has filed a motion to compel, which is pending in this Court Id. Plaintiff states that he needs the discovery to identify the Doe Defendants. Id. Plaintiff does not include the date he submitted the first set of interrogatories and requests for production of documents, but it appears that Plaintiff is referring to the same set of original interrogatories from February 9, 2012. See id.

On August 13, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to extend the discovery deadline. Doc. 52. In Plaintiff's motion, he again states that he has not received any discovery responses from Defendant. Id.

Defendant did not respond to Plaintiff's four (4) pending motions. This matter is deem submitted pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).

Plaintiff contends that he has never received responses to his original discovery requests from February 9, 2012. Docs. 49, 50, 51, 52. Defendant did not respond to Plaintiff's assertion. Thus, the Court has no record that Defendant has ever submitted discovery responses to Plaintiff. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motions to compel responses to Plaintiff's original first set of interrogatories and requests for production of documents from February 9, 2012.

Considering Plaintiff has not received any responses to discovery, the Court will grant his motions to modify the scheduling order. Since the Court is extending the deadline to amend pleadings and the discovery deadline, the Court also finds it necessary to extend the dispositive motion deadline.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motions to compel are GRANTED, as to Plaintiff's original first set of interrogatories and requests for production of documents from February 9, 2012;

2. Defendants are DIRECTED to respond to Plaintiff's original discovery requests from February 9, 2012;

3. Plaintiff's motions to modify the scheduling order are GRANTED;

4. The revised deadline to amend pleadings is November 13, 2012;

5. The revised discovery deadline is January 14, 2013; and

6. The revised dispositive motion deadline is March 14, 2013.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20120912

© 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.