IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 8, 2013
STEVEN DEXTER BROOKS, PLAINTIFF,
T. FELKER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
This action is set for settlement conference on June 14, 2013. Defendants seek to modify the scheduling order and stay the deadline to file dispositive motions pending the outcome of the settlement conference. Defendants conferred with plaintiff by telephone, and the parties agreed that defendants would seek an order vacating all pretrial dates and staying the dispositive motions deadline. (Dkt. Nos. 113 at 3; 113-1 at 2.) If the case does not settle, defendants ask that the dispositive motions deadline be reset to sixty days after the settlement conference date.
"The district court is given broad discretion in supervising the pretrial phase of litigation." Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Rule 16(b) provides that "[a] schedule may be modified only for good cause and with the judge's consent." Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). "The schedule may be modified 'if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.'" Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080, 1087 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Johnson., 975 F.2d at 607).
At the time of defendants' motion, the only pending deadline was the April 29, 2013 dispositive motions deadline. Discovery is closed. Good cause appearing, defendants' motion is granted. The dispositive motions deadline is vacated, and will be reset, if appropriate, following the June 14, 2013 settlement conference.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants' April 19, 2013 motion (dkt. no. 113) is granted; and
2. The dispositive motions deadline is vacated, and will be reset, if appropriate, following the June 14, 2013 settlement conference.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.