From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pogue v. Igbanosa

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 23, 2011
No. 1:07cv-01577-GMS (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2011)

Opinion

No. 1:07cv-01577-GMS.

February 23, 2011


ORDER


Pending before the Court are Plaintiff's Motion to Continue Trial Date and Reopen Discovery on a Limited Basis (Doc. 88); Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application to Shorten Time (Doc. 89); and Defendants' Response thereto (Doc. 90). After review and consideration,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting the Motion to Continue (Doc. 88) and vacating the trial currently set for March 30, 2011.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED reopening discovery for 120-days in which Plaintiff may serve and conduct the discovery and third-party practice set forth in Plaintiff's Motion. Defendant will have the right during the same 120-days to conduct discovery on Plaintiff's claims. Defendant will be limited to the same number of interrogatories, document production requests, and requests for admission as are proposed by Plaintiff.

1. Last day by which discovery requests may be submitted (discovery request cutoff date): May 24, 2011

1.1. No discovery requests may be submitted after this date except by stipulation of the parties or by Court order for good cause shown.
1.2. Responses to discovery must be filed within the time provided by the rules unless the parties stipulate otherwise.

2. If Defendants desire to take Plaintiff's deposition they may do so by no later than: June 23, 2011

2.1. Leave of Court for the taking of such deposition is granted pursuant to Rule 30(a)(2), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The deposition may be taken by telephone at the option of defendant(s).

3. Dispositive motion deadline is: August 22, 2011

4. Proposed joint pretrial order lodged with the Court by: August 22, 2011 or 30 days after the Court's ruling on dispositive motions, if any.

4.1. Plaintiff's counsel is responsible for initiating the drafting and submission of the proposed pretrial order in the form prescribed by the assigned trial judge.

5. Discovery disputes.

5.1. The Court will not entertain motions to compel discovery, motions for sanctions, motions for protective orders, or the like unless and until there has been compliance with the following procedure: In the event of a dispute over discovery, the parties must confer in good faith, in person or by telephone, and attempt to resolve the dispute. Rule 37(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. If the dispute remains unresolved, the parties must arrange and participate in a telephonic conference with the undersigned judge prior to bringing any discovery motions.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying the Ex Parte Application to Shorten Time (Doc. 89) as moot.

DATED this 23rd day of February, 2011.


Summaries of

Pogue v. Igbanosa

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 23, 2011
No. 1:07cv-01577-GMS (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2011)
Case details for

Pogue v. Igbanosa

Case Details

Full title:Leon H. Pogue, Plaintiff, v. Dr. Igbanosa, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 23, 2011

Citations

No. 1:07cv-01577-GMS (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2011)