Owens v. City of Sonora

Full title: ALLAN EDGAR OWENS, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SONORA, et al., Defendants.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 14, 2011

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00392-LJO-SKO (E.D. Cal. Oct. 14, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00392-LJO-SKO

10-14-2011

ALLAN EDGAR OWENS, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SONORA, et al., Defendants.

Sheila K. Oberto

ORDER DENYING STIPULATED

REQUEST TO MODIFY THE

SCHEDULING ORDER

(Docket No. 35)

On October 12, 2011, the parties filed a request to modify the scheduling order so that they would have additional time to complete discovery due to the ongoing cancer treatment of Defendant Officer Kevin Johnston. (Doc. 35.) The parties request the following changes:

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦Deadline ¦Current Deadline ¦Proposed Deadline ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦1. ¦Non-Expert Discovery ¦August 15, 2011 ¦January 23, 2012 ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦2. ¦Expert Disclosure ¦August 30, 2011 ¦December 15, 2011 ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦3. ¦Supp. Exp. Discl. ¦September 30, 2011 ¦January 15, 2012 ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦4. ¦Exp. Discovery ¦October 15, 2011 ¦[None proposed] ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦5. ¦Non-Disp. Filing Deadline ¦November 10, 2011 ¦5. 17e6b5ab2ebe8aa¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦6. ¦Non-Disp. Motion Hearing ¦December 14, 2011 ¦January 20, 2012 ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦7. ¦Disp. Mot. Filing Deadline ¦November 23, 2011 ¦January 27, 2012 ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦8. ¦Disp. Motion Hearing ¦December 12, 2011 ¦April 16, 2012 ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦9. ¦ Settlement Conference ¦January 3, 2012 ¦April 23, 2012 ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦10. ¦Pretrial Conference ¦January 23, 2012 ¦May 7, 2012 ¦ +------+----------------------------+--------------------+-------------------¦ ¦11. ¦Trial Date ¦February 28, 2012 ¦May 29, 2012 ¦ +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

The proposed deadlines do not leave sufficient time between the dispositive motion hearin; date and the pretrial conference date for the Court to consider and make a determination on an pending motion, nor is there enough time proposed between the pretrial conference date and the tria date. Further, the parties did not propose an expert discovery deadline, and the proposed non dispositive motion filing deadline is prior to the proposed discovery cut-off date.

The Court is willing to accommodate the parties' request for a modified schedule, but canno adopt the dates proposed in the stipulation. If the parties wish to re-file their request for an extensioi of the schedule, they should propose dates that maintain at least six weeks between the hearing dat for the dispositive motions and the pretrial conference as well as at least six weeks between the dat of the pretrial conference and the trial date. Further, they should propose an expert discover deadline and may wish to consider proposing a non-dispositive motion deadline that falls after th non-expert discovery deadline.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE