From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McBounds v. Clays

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Feb 24, 2023
2:19-cv-2208 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2023)

Opinion

2:19-cv-2208 KJM KJN P

02-24-2023

MARK McBOUNDS, Plaintiff, v. D. CLAYS, et al., Defendants.


[PROPOSED] ORDER

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On February 23, 2023, defendants filed a motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order. Plaintiff failed to respond to written discovery, and at plaintiff's deposition the parties met and conferred concerning plaintiff's required discovery responses. As a result, the discovery and scheduling order requires modification, and plaintiff does not oppose the motion. (ECF No. 50 at 2.)

“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).

Good cause appearing, defendants' motion is granted. Plaintiff is cautioned that he is required to cooperate in discovery, and his failure to do so may result in the issuance of sanctions, including a recommendation that this action be terminated. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2)(A) (sanctions may be imposed for failure to comply with a discovery order); Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(d)(3) (sanctions may be imposed for failure to serve answers to interrogatories or to respond to request for production of documents).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' motion for a forty-five day extension of time to file a motion to compel discovery response and dispositive motion (ECF No. 50) is granted.

2. The discovery deadline is extended to April 10, 2023, and the pretrial motions deadline is extended to July 3, 2023. In all other respects, the October 26, 2022 discovery and scheduling order (ECF No. 49) remains in effect.


Summaries of

McBounds v. Clays

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Feb 24, 2023
2:19-cv-2208 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2023)
Case details for

McBounds v. Clays

Case Details

Full title:MARK McBOUNDS, Plaintiff, v. D. CLAYS, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Feb 24, 2023

Citations

2:19-cv-2208 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2023)